
Book 



COMPANION 



TO THE 



BOOK OF GENESIS, 

■^ • 

BY SAMUEL H. TURNER, V>. D. 

PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE AND THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE IN THE 

THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH, AND OF THE 

HEBREW LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE IN COLUMBIA COLLEGE, NEW-YORK. 



NEW-YORK: 

STANFORD AND SWORDS, 139, BROADWAY. 
1846. 







PREFACE 



The Author of the following work does not 
hesitate to acknowledge, that he offers it to the 
public with some solicitude. Apart from any per- 
sonal considerations, which it would be affectation 
wholly to disclaim, there are others of a nature en- 
tirely different and vastly higher, which must make 
a strong impression on every writer who feels him- 
self to be a moral and responsible agent. To com- 
ment on the sacred Scriptures is to interpret what 
God formerly revealed ; and therefore, the attempt 
should be made with due seriousness of mind, and 
suitable intellectual preparation. The expositor 
should possess a competent acquaintance with the 
principles and laws of interpretation, and also with 
the various facts which bear, either directly or in- 
directly, on the points to be illustrated. He should 
exercise a proper care and judgment in selecting 
from the sources of information, and in applying his 
knowledge to the obscurities which are to be cleared 
up, and the difficulties which are to be removed. 
Whether these requisitions shall appear to be met, 



IV PREFACE. 



in any degree, in the subsequent pages, must be 
decided by the candid and intelligent examiner. 

It may be proper to inform the reader, that it was 
not my intention to write a complete commentary 
on the book of Genesis, or, in any sense, a prac- 
tical one. He need not therefore be surprised, if 
many things are here passed oyer which could not 
properly have been omitted in a more voluminous 
work, composed on a more extensive plan. The 
book now submitted to his inspection is intended as 
a companion to the first part of the Pentateuch. 
Far from being designed to lessen the importance 
or supersede the use of the inspired record, it does 
but accompany it as a servant and attendant. It is 
expected, therefore, that the reader will peruse it, 
and especially the Analysis, with the sacred volume 
open before him. Those who are acquainted with 
the original Hebrew, will, of course, prefer the 
fountain head of the truth. Others will find our 
admirable and generally accurate English transla- 
tion among the very best and purest of the streams. 

In the preparation both of the Analysis and the 
Notes, it has been my object to illustrate the book 
of Genesis by a constant reference to the original 
text, to other portions of Scripture, and to the 
best sources and aids of interpretation. In the 
hope, that, of those who may favor this volume with 
their attention, a considerable number will be com- 
petent to examine original authorities for them- 
selves, it appeared to be due to that class of readers, 






PREFACE. 



not to leave them without the means of determining 
on the correctness of the Author's representations. 
It is with this view, that I have occasionally intro- 
duced the authorities appealed to in their original 
language. It is hoped, however, that this will not 
deter the merely English reader from giving his 
attention to this work, as, in every instance, the 
original passages are accompanied by a translation, 
which, if not always literal, is yet sufficiently so to 
put him in possession of the writer's meaning. He 
will not object, because to one class of readers an 
advantage is afforded, of which it is his misfortune 
that he cannot avail himself. 

It will be perceived that the literal sense of the 
words is adhered to, when there is no sufficient 
reason for adopting a figurative meaning. And 
when a passage is susceptible of more expositions 
than one, I have thought it most in accordance with 
that candor which should govern the expositor, not 
to limit the reader to that, which to my own mind 
may be most satisfactory: being well assured of 
this, that uniformity of opinion respecting the 
meaning of difficult passages of Scripture is not 
to be expected, both on account of the nature of 
the grounds whereon such passages ought to be 
interpreted, and the character and habits of the 
mind, varying, as they do, in consequence of dif- 
ferent natural capacity, and also from the influence 
of education and incidental circumstances. If the 
data whereby to form a judgment respecting the 



\ 



VI PREFACE. 






meaning of a passage have not appeared sufficiently 
clear or complete to settle the true and necessary 
sense, Ihave purposely avoided the expression of 
a decided opinion, being of nothing more strongly 
persuaded than of this, that an affectation of know- 
ledge merely displays ignorance, and that an attempt 
to shroud in mystery what is clear, or to explain 
what is to us unintelligible, necessarily tends either 
to superstition or infidelity. 









} 



Page 


15, 


— 


68, 


- 


72, 


— 


83, 


— 


86, 


— 


102, 


— 


121, 
131, 


— 


380, 



ERRATA 



line 4 from bottom, for In read in. 

— 11 from bottom, for 60 read 40. 

— 7, for He read The. 

— 1, for xi. read ix. 

— 18, for 50 read 51. 

— 7 from bottom, for her reac? his. 

— 6 from bottom, for might reac? dignity. 

— 7 from bottomj/or idolatrise re<z<i idololatrise. 

— 6, /or rhb^' read rfrlB. 
380, — 19, for adapted, read adopted. 
385, — 16, for scareely, read scarcely. 



INTRODUCTION 



The Book of Genesis derives its name from the history of 
the creation, in Greek yhe<fis, with which it commences. The 
Jews designate the several books of the Pentateuch by the 
words with which they respectively begin ; this book, there- 
fore, is known by the name Bereshith, or Bereshith bara, 

Although the book is a part of the Pentateuch, and conse- 
quently not in all respects an entire work, it is still suffi- 
ciently complete in itself to admit of its being examined in- 
dependently of the four books which succeed it. It may be 
divided generally into two portions. The first, chap, i — xi. 26, 
contains the principal events from the creation to the birth of 
| Abraham, with genealogical lists of such of the ancestors of 
that patriarch as had preserved a due regard for religion and 
good morals. The second portion, comprehending the re- 
mainder of the book, furnishes a more detailed history of 
\ Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, continuing to the death of Jo- 
I seph ; and in this portion the promises made to the patriarchs 
^form everywhere the most conspicuous object. 

After an account of the creation, of the original state of 
man, and of the fall, the first portion proceeds to relate the 
: increase of irreligion and immorality, until, about the year 
I 235, (iv. 26 ; v. 3, 6,) the true worshippers of the Deity were 
distinguished by the appellation " sons of God," whilst those 
who disregarded the divine instructions and were led by 
merely human propensities, were called children " of men." 
2 



10 INTRODUCTION. 






Of the former class were the ancestors of Noah, who are 
consequently here introduced, (chap, v.) although the gene- 
alogy, like a long parenthesis, interrupts the close connexion 
between iv. 26 and vi. 1. For the same cause the extraor- 
dinary piety of Enoch and his translation are mentioned in 
v. 22 ss. The intermarriages or illicit union of these two 
classes of persons produced at last so general a corruption 
of religion and morals, that God destroyed by a flood all 
living creatures except Noah and his family, and the various 
animals which were preserved along with them in the ark. 
On account of the importance of this terrific event, it is 
related with more than usual particularity, (vi. 9 — ix. 29.) 
This is followed by a genealogical and geographical ac- 
count of settlements made in the world, (chap, x.) and then, 
(xi. 1 — 9,) the attempt to build the tower of Babel is related, 
which, as it gave rise to the dispersion, is intimately con- 
nected with the account of that event. The posterity of 
Shem, with whom religion and morals were preserved long- 
est and in the greatest purity, are then introduced, (xi. 26,) 
down to the birth of Abraham. 

The second portion of the book contains a more particu- 
lar account of facts in which the Israelites were interested. 
As the family of Terah were idolatrous, (Josh. xxiv. 2 ; Gen. 
xxxi. 30, xxxv. 2,) Abraham is divinely called to go to Ca- 
naan, where a numerous posterity is promised him, and the 
settlement of his descendants through Isaac, after a resi- 
dence of four hundred years in a foreign land ; and also, that, 
in his posterity " all nations should be blessed," (xii. 2, 3 ; 
xiii. 14 — 17 ; xv. 4, 5, 7, 13 — 18 ; xvii. 4 — 8 ; xviii. 18 ; xxii 
17, 18 ;) all which has in view the preservation of the know- 
ledge of God and true religion, together with the coming of 
a spiritual deliverer to bring the blessing of salvation to man- 
kind. These promises, which are repeated to Isaac, (xxvi. 
1 — 5,) and to Jacob, (xxviii. 13 — 15,) are the principal point 



INTRODUCTION. 11 

>n which every thing in this domestic history turns, the ac- 
count of Joseph not excepted, as this includes the descent 
of Jacob's family into Egypt, where they became exceedingly 
numerous. Whatever is introduced in relation to other 
families and nations, has some bearing on the history of 
these patriarchs, or concerns some collateral branches of 
their families. See chap. xiv. 17 ss.; xxv. 1 — 4, 12 — 16; 
xxxvi.* 

That the Pentateuch, and consequently the Book of Gene- 
sis as a constituent part of it, is the genuine work of Moses, 
is supported by the tradition of the whole church, both Jew- 
ish and Christian, which, with unanimous consent, ascribe it 
to this most extraordinary man, whose deeply religious cha- 
racter, natural talents, and profound and extensive learning, 
abundantly qualified him, under that inspiration of the Holy 
Spirit by which he was guided, to prepare the work, and to 
rule over the people of God, for whose use it was originally 
designed. In the earlier ages of the primitive Christian 
church, some of the Gnosticks and certain other heretics did 
indeed oppose the genuineness of the Pentateuch ; but their 
efforts were directed chiefly against the divine origin of the 
law which it contained, and some of the historical narratives 
which it recounted, which appeared to them unworthy of 
the Divine Being. j- The fathers considered the Pentateuch 
as the original work of Moses, restored through inspiration 
by Ezra, after its loss in consequence of the Babylonian cap- 
tivity. The notion of this fabulous restoration originated 
with the Jews themselves. 

The suspicion that the Pentateuch contains interpolations, 
may also be traced to the same source. Isaac Ben Jasus, 

* Jahn's Introduction, Part II. § 2. 

f On this ground they are said in the Clementines to be false. See 
Homily II, chapters 41 — 44, 52, in Le Clerc's edition of Cotelerius, 
> Ant. 1700, vol. I. p. 632, 634. 






12 INTRODUCTION. 

a Spanish Jew,* in the beginning of the eleventh century, 
suggested the idea that some portions of the Pentateuch 
were composed after the time of Moses. The 36th chapter 
of Genesis, for instance, he ascribed to the age of Jehosha- 
phat. Aben Ezra, who mentions this opinion with disap- 
probation, still admits that some interpolated passages occur. 
This learned writer is generally considered as the first who 
opposed the genuineness of the Pentateuch. Spinoza appeals 
to his authority, and endeavours thereby to support his own 
opinion, that the Pentateuch owes its present form to the 
labours of Ezra. Tract. Theol. Polit. Cap. 8. See Hand- 
buch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung in das Alte Testa- 
ment, by H. A. Ch. Haevernick, Erlangen, 1836, vol. I. 
p. 634—636. 

It is unnecessary to mention various writers, who, in some 
form or other, have denied the genuineness of the Penta- 
teuch, and consequently of the Book of Genesis. However 
great may have been the influence of their productions 
within a limited time and space, their objections have always 
been met by solid answers, and the genuineness of the Pen- 
tateuch as the authentic work of Moses has been vindicated 
to the satisfaction of the candid and intelligent. The reader 
will find a masterly discussion of this subject in Jahn's In- 
troduction, Part II. § 3 — -14. And in defending the genuine- 
ness of the five books of Moses, he comprehends also of 
course that of Genesis. For, as he remarks,! ' the events 
herein related are alluded to in the time of Joshua and in all; 
the following ages, as well known equally with those in th< 
remaining books ; whence it may justly be inferred, that Geni- 
esis, from the time of Joshua downward, having been coirw 
prehended under the general titles of the L^aw, the Law of 

* See Wolf's Bibliotheca Hebraja, Tom. I. p. 339, No. 15, and 
p. 662, No. 1208. 
f P. 190, 191. 






INTRODUCTION. 13 

ehovah, the Law of Moses, and the Book of the Law of 
!oses, was attributed to Moses. There is the less room for 
doubting this, inasmuch as Genesis and the first chapters of 
Exodus form a necessary introduction to what follows,* 
and, on the contrary, in the remaining books of the Penta- 
teuch, there are frequent references to the events narrated 
in Genesis and the first chapters of Exodus ; so that both 
parts are closely connected in such a manner that neither 
would be perfect without the other. The Hebrews, de- 
graded during their residence in Egypt so as to worship 
creatures, and, as had been foreseen by Moses, thence- 
forward continually prone to idolatry, needed the instruction 
given in Genesis and the former part of Exodus, respecting 
the nature of the deity whom they at Mount Sinai had ac- 
' knowledged as their king, whose laws they had received, 
and to whom they proffered their reverence and gratitude 
tor his mercies, by their Sabbaths and solemn feasts, by 
tpeir sacrifices and first fruits, by their obedience to his 
laws, and by all their acts of homage and worship. If they 
had been unacquainted with this part of the Pentateuch, 
they must have been ignorant of the nature of the Deity 
whom they professed to worship ; they could not at that 
remote period have known their king as God the Creator 
and Governor of the Universe ; they could not have undei> 
stood his frequently recurring titles, the God of Abraham, 
of Isaac, and of Jacob ; they could not have been able to 

* The connexion of Genesis with the subsequent books, as introductory 
their contents, and in some measure serving as an explanation and 
lefence of the proceedings which they relate, will be evident upon an 
inspection of the following passages, all of which contain matter either 
alluded to in subsequent books, or else corresponding with some particu- 
lars therein developed. Chap. ii. 3; ix. 1 — 17, 20 — 27; xii. 1 — 3; xiii, 
/ 14 — 17; xv.; xvii. ; xix. 30 — 38; xxi. 1 — 20; xxiv. 2—8; xxv. 1—6, 
19 — 34; xxvii. ; xxviii. ; xxxv. 9 — 15; xxxvi. 6; xlvi. 1 — 7; xlviii. ; 
xlix. 1, 7—13. 



\ 



14 INTRODUCTION. 

ascertain what was meant by the frequent references to th 
promises made to the patriarchs ; and they must have been 
entirely in the dark, as to the number and nature of those 
wonderful works, which are so frequently mentioned in the 
remaining books of Moses. On all these subjects, oral 
tradition must, by the general lapse into idolatry, have 
become exceedingly depraved, if not totally obliterated, in 
the course of ages. The same writer, therefore, who, in 
his care for the information of the Hebrews even of remote 
periods, committed the Pentateuch to writing, would not 
have left instruction so necessary for that people, especially 
those of them who lived in later ages, as that contained in 
the book of Genesis and the former part of Exodus, to be 
supplied by oral tradition ; neither is it credible that he 
did/ 

But if the book of Genesis were written by Moses, agree- 
ably to all ancient tradition and scriptural reference, 
inasmuch as the work contains narrations of events which 
took place long before the time of the author, the question 
arises, whence did he obtain his information ? He must have 
derived his knowledge of the facts recorded either from 
immediate divine revelation, or from oral tradition, or from 
written documents or other monuments. The nature of 
many of the facts and the minuteness of the narration, render it 
quite improbable that such detailed accounts were commu- 
nicated by immediate revelation. That all his knowledge 
should have been derived from oral tradition, appears 
morally impossible, when we consider the great number of 
names, of ages, of dates, and of minute events, which ar$ 
recorded. It remains, then, that he must have obtained! 
some information from written documents, coeval, or nearly 
so, with the events which they recorded, and composed by I 
persons intimately acquainted with the subjects to which 
they relate. That these were few in number, appears 



/ 



INTRODUCTION. 15 

>robable from the simple and uncultivated habits and the 
tumble occupations of the Hebrews previously to their re- 
moval to Egypt, and from their oppressed and degraded 
state while there, all of which are unfavourable alike to 
\ literary pursuits and historical research. It is probable, 
] therefore, that the history given by Moses in Genesis is 
, derived principally from short memoranda and genea- 
logical tables written by the patriarchs, or under their 
superintendence, and preserved by their posterity until the 
time of Moses, who made use of them, with additions from 
authentic tradition or existing monuments, under the gui- 
dance of the Holy Spirit, and thus prepared his work. 
Indeed, it is not improbable that the Hebrew legislator intro- 
duced some patriarchal narrations into his book with little 
or no alteration. The existence of written documents 
anterior to the time of Moses is unquestionable.* The au^ 
thority of the book of Job, (xix. 23, 24,) and the late Egyptian 
disclosures, place this beyond a doubt. And it is difficult to 
think that documents were not used in preparing such nar- 
ratives as that of Joseph, and some parts of the history of 
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It is remarked by Ewald, in 
' his work on the composition of Genesis, respecting the 

* The subject of the early use of writing in reference to its bearing on 
the antiquity and genuineness of the Pentateuch, is carefully investigated 
by Dr. E. W. Hengstenberg, in his work on the authenticity of the 
Pentateuch (Die Authentic des Pentateuches,) vol. I. p. 415-502, 
Berlin, 1836. As I shall hereafter refer to this work, it may be well to 
state, that it is the second part of the author's contributions towards an 
introduction to the Old Testament, of which his work on the Authenticity 
of Daniel and the Integrity of Zechariah constitute the first, and was 
published at Berlin, 183 L. His Christology of the Old Testament has 
keen translated by Professor Keith of Alexandria, and was published Jn 
/hree 8vo. volumes, the first at Alexandria, D. C. in 1836, and the 

< remaining two at Washington, D. C. in 1839. This work ought to be 

• in the hands of every student of theology. 



16 INTRODUCTION. 

narrative of the flood,* that, although indeed it might hav< 
been abbreviated and some collateral circumstances omitted, 
yet the writer evidently intends to show the divine agency 
even in the details, that he is under the influence of strong 
feeling, and describes the tragic event with minuteness and 
particularity, as if he had himself been an eye-witness. 
This is, as he adds, strikingly characteristic of Hebrew 
history, and is by no means confined to the account of the 
flood, but pervades the whole book of Genesis. The artist 
draws from the life, and delineates the vivid scene with all 
the freshness of nature and reality. It is not to be ques- 
tioned, that this might be done by a writer who lived long 
after the facts related ; but the opinion, that Moses employed 
certain patriarchal accounts composed by some one who,, 
had himself beheld the scene related, or else had heard il 
from an eye-witness, is probable, to say the least. On su< 
a theory, the credibility, historic accuracy, and inspire 
authority of the book, derive additional strength: for the 
original author becomes an eye-witness, or either contempo- 
raneous or nearly so with the facts related ; and some of 
the facts are of such a nature that they could have been 
derived only from immediate revelation ; and the whole 
being compiled by an inspired writer, have received the 
sanction of the Holy Spirit in an equal degree with his 
original productions. f 

* Die Komposition der Genesis kritisch untersucht, von Dr. H. A 
Ewald. Braunschweig, 1823, p. 85. 

f The reader will perhaps observe a striking verbal correspondence 
between some portions of this paragraph and parts of pages xxxiii and 
xxxiv of Professor Bush's Introduction to his Notes on the Book Jf 
Genesis. As I do not wish it to be supposed that I would quote the 
Professor's language without the ordinary marks of acknowledgment, I 
think proper to state that the corresponding portions were written by» 
me, and published as notes to Jahn's Introduction, translated by Pro- \ 
fessor Whittingham and myself. See p. 204, 205. The notes of Mr. , 
Bush were published in 1839, Jahn's Introduction in 1827. 



INTRODUCTION. 17 

The book of Genesis then appears as the work of Moses, 
fai preparing which, he was assisted by divine inspiration, 
suggesting what could not otherwise be known ; by docu- 
ments previously written ; by standing monuments raised 
to commemorate historical or domestic facts ; and by oral 
tradition handed down from early ages. On this last men- 
tioned mode of conveying truth, the more reliance will be 
placed in proportion as we rightly consider the longevity of 
human life at the period in question, the vast importance of 
the topics transmitted, and the deep interest felt in their pre- 
servation. 

The theory of pre-exi stent documents was first cautiously 
advanced by Vitringa, who speaks of " scrolls and docu- 

. ments of the patriarchs preserved among the Israelites, and 
i collected, digested, and arranged by Moses, and filled up 
wherein they were defective."* It was soon after proposed 
again by Le Cene - )-, and to a moderate extent, adopted by 
0&lmet,J and Bishop Gleig.§ Astrtjc was the first who 
attempted to mark out the various documents of which the 
book of Genesis consists. In his work on this subject,|| he 

I supposed them to be twelve in number. He contended also 

* "Has vero schedas et scrinia patrum, apud Israelitas conservata, 
Mosem opinamur collegisse, digessisse, ornasse, et ubi deficiebant 
complesse, atque ex iis primum librorum suorum confecisse." Obser- 
vationes Sacra, Lib. 1. cap. iv. § 2, p. 36 ss. Ed. Francq. 1712. 

f Bible de Le Cene, Tom. I. p. ix. Col. 2, and p. x. Col. 1 and 2, 
which, however, was not printed until 1741. See an able dissertation 
u La Bible de Vence, Tom. I. p. 266 ss. ed. 2. 

t Commentaire Litterale, Tom. I. P. I. p. xiii. 

§ Introduction to Stackhouse's History of the Bible. See also 
Horne's Introduction, vol. I. p. 54, 55, 6th edition. A list of writers by 
jwhom this opinion has been supported may be seen, with accurate 
preferences, in Holder on the Fall, chap. II. p. 32, 33. 

|| Conjectures sur les memoires originaux dont il paroit que Moyse 
s'est servi pour composer le livre de Genese. Paris, 1753, 8vo. 
3 



18 INTRODUCTION. 

that the first chapters of Exodus were likewise derived 
from them. This, however, no judicious person will allow. \ 
Eichhorn, in his Introduction,* modified this hypothesis so as \ 
to limit the number of primitive documents to two, the one 
remarkable for using the term Jehovah as the name of God, 
while the other employs Elohim. Whatever is not derived 
from these two, he considers as original with the author. 
IlgenI makes the distinction of three documents, two of 
which employ the word Elohim, and the other Jehovah ; 
one of the former approximating both in language and 
character to the latter. These hypotheses are all ingenious- 
ly devised, but not one of them has received universal ap- 
probation. Each system rests upon far-fetched and arbi- 
trary assumptions, and supposes the collector of the docu- 
ments to resemble its framer in views and dispositions. 
Other theories of the same sort might be contrived, and, h 
fact, a new one was proposed by Kelle,J in 1811-12, ai 
yet none will be universally acceptable ; and after all, if any 
one were capable of being established by more ingenious 
arguments than all the rest, the only advantage to be derived 
would be, that then the documents employed in preparing the 
book of Genesis might be enumerated. § But such a designa- 
tion of original documents incorporated into the book cannot 

* Einleitung ins A. T. Theil II. § 416-427. 

f In his Urkunden des Jerusalemischen Tempelarchivs, 1798. 

t In his Vorurtheilsfreye Wiirdigung der Mosaischen Schriften. 
The author afterwards retracted his views, in his work entitled, DU 
heiligen Schriften in ihrer Urgestalt, Deutsch und mit neuen Ai 
merkungen, von K. G. Kelle, Freyberg, 1817, where he maintains 
that Genesis consists of a single genuine work of Moses, much interpo- 
lated by the priests of the race of Ithamar, and takes great pains to 
separate the supposed interpolations from the original work. A refu- 
tation of his hypothesis may be seen in Rosen Mueller's Scholia, > 
p. 52 ss. 

§ Jahn, p. 204, 205. 






f 



INTRODUCTION. 19 

>e made. Even Rosenmiiller maintains the impossibility of 
pointing out any certain distinction between the several doc- 

f uments of which the book of Genesis is composed. This 
assertion he maintains at some length, examining the different 

' criteria, showing their want of certainty, and proving the 
futility of all attempts to discover, after a lapse of 3,000 

i years, the precise nature and extent of the records used by 
Moses in the preparation of his work. 

Before the authorship of the book of Genesis became a 
subject of discussion, numerous interpolations were supposed 
to be found in it ; and this opinion was maintained by some 
writers of distinction, both Jewish and Christian. After- 
wards the hypothesis of documents was advanced ; and 

■ s some of its advocates, not content with admitting the fact 
that Moses did really employ such written sources of his- 
torical truth, undertook to ascertain their number, to de- 
termine their commencing and terminating points, to settle 
their character, and to pass judgment on their style, demon- 
strating that Moses, the learned and gifted Hebrew legisla- 
tor, could not so have written. The theory of documents 
prepared the way for that of fragments.* Phenomena on 
which that theory was supposed to be founded, appeared, it 
was thought, in many smaller sections, even of the supposed 
documents, and the book of Genesis was subdivided into a 
multitude of portions, the larger were reduced to smaller, 

1 connected parts to disjointed fragments. It would be useless 
to mention, and very idle to examine, all the alleged reasons 
for such a procedure. But the principal allegations, on the 
ground of which the book of Genesis has been said to con- 
sist of independent documents and disconnected fragments, 

* The fragmentary character of the book of Genesis, and particular- 
ly of the former part of it, is maintained even by Herder in his 
third letter on the study of Theology, Briefe das Studium der Theologie 
betreffend; Collected Works, Stutgard and Tubingen, vol. xiii. p. 41, 42. 






20 INTRODUCTION. 









must not be passed over without some notice. If the reader 
wishes any fuller discussion than what the following brieA 
remarks afford, he will find a very able examination of the 
alleged difficulties in the work of Ewald, before referred 
to. Havernick, in his Introduction, Part I. § 112, has 
made use of this acute and learned writer's labours. 

1. The inscriptions are thought to indicate different docu- 
ments or fragments. 

But one writer may well be supposed to prefix suitable 
inscriptions to the respective narratives, as they are related 
by him. Indeed, the use of £l 1*1 5*1, occurring principally 
in Genesis, and, derived from this source perhaps, appear- 
ing in a few other books, rather agrees with the opinion of 
one author than several. I mean that the balance of proba- J 
bilities is in favour of this view, rather than of the contrary.! 
Certainty, in such matters, is not indeed to be expected ; 
but any one who considers how natural it would be for an 
author to bring forward the subdivisions of his work wi1(h 
introductions suited to the particular topics of such subdivi- 
sions, will hardly find in these inscriptions much evidence ol 
different documents. To show the usage of the orientals ^ 
on this subject of inscriptions, I refer the reader to Ewald's 
work, p. 183, ss. 

2. The isolated character of the parts is appealed to in i 
support of the same theory. These are said to want con- 
nexion, and that harmony in the manner of representation j 
which characterizes a single author. 

If by this nothing more is meant than that several of the 
narrations which the book contains are introduced some 
what abruptly, and without much effort to prepare the 1 
reader's mind, it may be granted. And this accords with 
the ordinary manner of eastern writing, and harmonizes 
with the usual narrative style of Scripture ; and it might be 
expected to characterize a work of so high antiquity as the 



INTRODUCTION. 21 



pook of Genesis. Introductions of historical events by re- 
ftnarks of a somewhat general nature, which gradually lead 

/the reader's mind from preceding to subsequent accounts 
by observations founded on a philosophical view of things, 
belonged neither to the age nor the country, and therefore it 

| would be unreasonable to expect them. 

3. The repetitions with which it is said the book abounds, 
is thought to prove its fragmentary character. 

As repetitions in language are frequent in ancient, orien- 
tal, and Hebrew writings, so also are repetitions of subject. 
The speaker pours out the theme, with which his soul is full, 
in repeated bursts of feeling or exhibitions of fact. And not 

\only the speaker, the principal agent, the magna pars in the 
transaction, but the author also w T ho relates the facts, parti- 
cipates in the same emotions, and stamps them on his work. 
Thus it becomes the impress both of the author's and the 
agent's mind, and its repetitions only show its admirable 
conformity to nature. This characteristic of Hebrew his- 
tory is by no means inconsistent with its well-known brevity. 
In general, its statements are short and compressed. The 
( author directs his eye to his ultimate object, frequently pass- 
ing over the intermediate portions, which he afterwards il- 
lustrates and amplifies. Thus, as might be expected, repeti- 
tions would arise, the natural result of an endeavour to fill 
up and complete the representation. 

Repetitions occur, when the author, having thrown into 
\ the general narrative an account of some particular circum- 
stance, wishes to mark its prominency above the rest, and 
^therefore introduces a brief notice of this point, to which he 
attaches especial importance. The reader cannot fail to 
I observe several such places in Genesis, as also in other 
f books of the Old Testament. But such repetitions might be 
expected from one and the same author writing a continu- 
ous account, and are certainly no indications of a fragment- 



\ 



22 



INTRODUCTION. 



\ 



ary character of his work. So also in passing over from 
one circumstance to another, it is not uncommon to repeat 
the conclusion of the preceding account. Thus the antece-' 
dent narrative is connected with the subsequent. Some- 
times indeed a considerable part of what has already been 
related is again introduced, — it may be in language some- 
what different, — in order to prepare the way for some new 
and perhaps striking circumstance, to the connexion of which 
with the account repeated, the author would particularly di- 
rect the attention of his reader. Or the repetition may be 
intended to recall to the reader's mind what had been before 
stated, the thread of the narrative having been broken off 
by certain intervening accounts. 

For these and other causes, which will probably suggest 
themselves, repetitions, sometimes verbal and sometimes 
merely in substance, appear in the book of Genesis. But, 
as Ewald has shown by a full induction of particulars, they 
appear also in an equal degree in other historical books of 
the Old Testament, and not unfrequently in other oriental 
histories. Verbal repetitions occur also in the works of 
Homer. The inference therefore which has been so hastily 
and confidently drawn, that the book consists of various 
independent fragments or documents, is entirely unsupported 
by the facts. 

4. It is said that different accounts of one and the same 
fact are found in the work. A publication, which, without 
unity of plan, is made up of fragments of several authors not 
contemporaneous, might be expected to contain narrations, 
which, in particular circumstances, or in the disposition 01^ 
design of the whole, are contradictory. Such phenomena 
are alleged to occur in the book of Genesis. But this as- 
sertion has never been supported by sufficient evidence. 
That different etymological meanings of the same name are 
suggested, as in the cases of Noah, Esau, Reuben, Zebulon, 






INTRODUCTION. 23 

>seph, and others, cannot be proved. The idea that such 
phenomena indicate various writers is a mere fiction. The 
plain solution is this : the one author employs the paronoma- 
sia, so favorite a figure with the Hebrews ; he uses a term 
which corresponds in sound with that already employed, and 
which conveys an idea in harmony with its meaning, or with 
the circumstances of the occasion. Neither has it been 
proved that different narratives of the same fact are to be 
found in the book. The relation in the second chapter is not, 
as has often been said, an account independent of that con- 
tained in the first. New matter is introduced, preparatory 
to which a portion of what had been stated in the first is 
repeated in different language. Abraham's twofold denial 
of his wife, and the similar narrative of Isaac, may indeed 
excite our surprise ; but they afford no proof of a repetition 
of the same identical fact. In this, as in most, if not all of 
the other alleged points of evidence, the identity of the ac- 
counts has been taken for granted, and of course the theory 
to be proved has been assumed. This may be produced as 
one among many illustrations of the logical character of that 
species of criticism for which our own age is distinguished. 
It is easier to appeal to some internal feeling beyond the un- 
derstanding, than to establish plain declarations on palpable 
evidence. 

The unity of the book of Genesis, and of its author, is 
shown from the uniform and steady progress of the narra- 
tive, from the beginning to the end, each part of the history 
following very naturally that which immediately precedes. 
They follow either as parts of the history absolutely neces- 
sary to its perfection, or else as collateral accounts, interest- 
ing to those for whom the book was originally intended, and 
| illustrative of its more prominent portions. If the book be 
one connected history, and not disjointed fragments, it can- 
not have been merely arranged in chronological order from 



\ 



24 



INTRODUCTION. 



previously existing accounts, by some compiler, who col 
lected the documents into one whole, without making am 
alteration in the distinct narrations. The undoubted marks' 
of unity, both of plan and object, which the book exhibits, are 
inconsistent with this theory ; unless indeed it be limited by 
very important modifications. It is evidently the intention 
of the whole book, with the exception of those introductory 
portions which precede the history of Abraham, to give an 
account of the people of God, from their origin to their set- 
tlement in Egypt. In doing this, the writer, in the progress 
of his work, continually alludes to what had been before 
stated, sometimes in similar and sometimes in the very same 
language ; and this language in several instances is peculiar 
to the book, and in others evidently original in it. Doubtless, j 
as I have before said, he availed himself of documents and- 
other sources of information previously existing, and, agree- 
ably to Hebrew usage, he retained the very phraseology (p 
these documents so far as was consistent with his one ob- 
ject ; but, in doing this, he adapted these sources of informa- 
tion to his purpose, modifying their language as the necessity 
of the case might require. In this respect, the work is anal- \ 
ogous in some measure to the books of Samuel and of 
Kings. 

5. I come now to consider another supposed indication of 
the documentary or fragmentary character of the book of 
Genesis, the use of the divine names, to which not a few j 
writers have appealed with unbounded confidence. For/ 
this reason, and an account of the interest and importance 
of the subject, the reader will bear with me, if I should b< 
more diffuse than heretofore. The subject is important, anc 
deserves careful consideration. 

It is hardly possible to read the book of Genesis attend 
tively without observing that the Deity is therein designated 
by different names, and that these names are used in a very 









) 






INTRODUCTION. 25 

markable manner. Sometimes the term God (Elohim,) 
ccurs, sometimes Lord, (Jehovah,) and sometimes both are 
united. In i. 1 — ii. 3, God is invariably used ; in ii. 4 — iii. 24, 
Lord God, except in iii. 1, 3, 5, where the speaker is a dif- 
ferent person from the author ; in iv. except v. 25, where 
Eve is introduced speaking, Lord alone. The facts in rela- 
tion to this point, which a careful perusal of the whole book 
exhibits, plainly show, that these terms are frequently em- 
ployed in such a manner as could not have been the result 
of chance, or of a mere intention to relieve the mind of the 
reader by an agreeable variety. To ascertain the ground 
on which the sacred writer has ordinarily employed one or 
other of these words in denoting the Supreme Being, is there- 
fore an inquiry of no little interest, and in its connexions and 
'results it is one of great importance. 
, The following table, which shows the usage throughout 
the book of Genesis, will enable the reader to form some 
judgment on the question, whether the use of these terms 
is incidental, or has a view to any particular design. It is 
founded on tables given by Drechsler, p. 5 — 7, in his work 
on the unity and genuineness of Genesis.* He continues the 
list to Exodus xxiv. inclusive, and gives others, showing the 
usage in Judges and 2 Samuel, (p. 3 — 5,) from which it ap- 

* Die Einheit und Aechtheit der Genesis, von Dr. Moritz Drechs- 
ler; Hamburg, 1838, 8vo. This volume has an intimate connexion 
with another, published by the author in the preceding year, in which he 
attacks the literary character of certain late writers in the province of 
Old Testament criticism, particularly Von Bohlen and Vatke. It is 
entitled " Die Unwissenschaftlichkeit im Gebiete der Alttestament- 
lichen Kritik, belegt aus den Schriften neuerer Kritiker, besonders der 
Herren Von Bohlen und Vatke." Some notice of this book may be 
seen in the New York Review, No. Ill, January, 1838. — Drechsler 
,' remarks that the list of places in which the divine names occur as given 
by Ewald, in his work on the composition of Genesis, is not altogether 
to be relied on. Some inaccuracies and omissions in his own I have 
corrected and supplied in the following table. 
4 






26 



INTRODUCTION. 



pears that the Lord, <T1<T is much the most frequently 
employed. The combined term, Lord God, which Drechsler^ 
gives in the same columns with Lord and God, is here sepa- 
rated from both the others. It occurs only in the following 
texts: Gen. ii. 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22; hi. 1, 
8 twice, 9, 13, 14, 21, 22, 23 ; ix. 26 ; xv. 2, 8. In xxiv. 3, 
7, 12, 27, and 42, both terms do indeed appear, but only one 
is used as a name of the Deity, the other being connected 
with what follows, as, "the Lord, God of my master Abra- 
ham," as in xxvii. 20, "the Lord, thy God." Comp. xxviii. 
21. All these places belong to that class in which the term 
Lord is employed. With the exception therefore of one 
place in the 9th chapter and two in the 15th, the connected 
use of the two terms is confined to the 2d and 3d chapters. 



Lord, m'rp 



God, tPi-J^ or b& 

i. 1, 2, 3, 4 twice, 5, 6, 7, 

10 twice, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 
20, 21 twice, 22, 24, 25 twicje, 
26, 27 twice, 28 twice, 29, 31. 



iv. 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 13, 15 twice, 16, 26. 

v. 29. 

vi. 3, 5,* 6, 7, 8. 

vii. 1, 5, 16. 

viii. 20, 21 twice. 

x. 9. 

xi. 5, 6, 8, 9 twice. 

xii. 1, 4, 7 twice, 8 twice, 17. 

xiii. 4, 10 twice, 13, 14, 18. 

xiv. 22. 

xv. 1, 4, 6, 7, 18. 

xvi. 2, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11 twice, 13. 



ii. 2, 3 twice. 

iii. 1, 3, 5. 

iv. 25. 

v. 1 twice, 22, 24 twice. 

vi. 2, 4, 9, 11, 12, 13, 22. 

vii. 9, 16, 

viii. 1 twice, 15. 

ix. 1, 6, 8, 12, 16, 17, 27. 



xiv. 18, 19, 20, 22. 
xvi. 13. 






• 



* Our English Translation and Cranmer's Bible have " God" ; but the 
original is Lord, JlirP? and this is followed in the Geneva version. 



INTRODUCTION. 



> Lord, rrirr 

jxvii. 1. 

Txviii. 1, 13, 14, 17, 19 twice, 20, 22, 
26, 33. 
xix. 13 twice, 14, 16, 24 twice, 27. xix. 29 twice. 



27 



GW, dW& or b^ 
xvii. 1, 3, 9, 15, 18, 19, 22, 23. 






xx. 18. 

xxi. 1 twice, 33. 

xxii. 11, 14 twice, 15, 16. 



xxiv. 1, 3, 7, 12, 21, 26, 27 twice, 
31, 35, 40, 42, 44, 48 twice, 50, 
51, 52, 56. 
xxv. 21 twice, 22, 23. 
xxvi. 2, 12, 22, 24, 25, 28, 29. 
'vxxvii. 7, 20, 27. 
\xxviii. 13 twice, 16, 21. 

ixix. 31, 32, 33, 35. 
\x. 24, 27, 30. 

:xi. 3, 49. 

/xxxii. 10, (Eng. Tr. 9.) 



\ 



xx. 3, 6, 11, 13, 17 twice. 

xxi. 2, 4, 6, 12, 17 thrice, 19, 20, 

22, 23, 33. 
xxii. 1, 3, 8, 9, 12, 
xxiii. 6, (prince of God; Eng. Tr. 

mighty prince.) 



xxv. 11. 

xxvii. 28. 

xxviii. 3, 4, 12, 17, 19, (house of 
God; Eng. Tr. Bethel,) 20, 22. 

xxx. 2, 6, 8, (wrestlings of God,) 

17, 18, 20, 22 twice, 23. 
xxxi. 7, 9, 11, 13, 16 twice, 24, 

42, 50. 
xxxii. 2, 3, 29, 31, (Eng. Tr. 1, 2, 

28, 30.) 
xxxiii. 5, 10, 11, 20. 
xxxv. 1 twice, 3, 5, 7 twice, 9, 10, 

11 twice, 13, 15. 



xxxviii. 7 twice, 10. 

xxxix. 2, 3 twice, 5 twice, 21, xxxix. 9. 
23 twice. 






xlix. 18. 



xl. 8. 

xli. 16, 25, 28, 32 twice, 38, 39, 

51, 52. 
xlii. 18, 28. 
xliii. 14, 29. 
xliv. 16. 
xlv. 5, 7, 8. 9. 
xlvi. 2, 3. 

xlviii. 3, 9, 11, 15, 20, 21. 
xlix. 25. 
1. 19, 20, 24, 25. 



28 



INTRODUCTION. 



\ 



It is presumed that no one can carefully examine tW& 
usage exhibited in this table, without a disposition to consi- 
der, whether it be attributable to chance, or to some definite 
and assignable cause. 

In assisting the reader to form a judgment on this point, I 
shall freely avail myself of the valuable labours of Drechs- 
ler and Hengstenberg,* occasionally, however, suggesting 
doubts of the certainty of the results to which they have 
arrived. For the history of the subject I am indebted \ 
entirely to the last mentioned author. 

The first reference to the different use of the divine names 
in Genesis occurs in Tertullian, in his treatise against Her- 
mogenes, cap. 3, Tom. II. p. 61, edit. Semler, (p. 234, edit. 
Rigalt.) It was observed also by Augustin, de Genesi ad 
literam, viii. 11. edit. Bened. Tom. III. p. 176; and also by 
Chrysostom, in his 14th Homily on Genesis, Opp. Tom. II. 
p. 119, Franc, (edit. Paris. 1636, p. 136; edit. Bened. 
Tom. IV. p. 108.) The two former writers ascribe the dif- 
ference to design, but fruitlessly endeavour to account for 
it by considering the meaning of wgiog, or dominus. The 
latter imagines them to be equivalent in meaning, and used 
indifferently. 

Among the Jewish writers of the middle ages, Rabbi 
Jehudah Hallevi,! of the 12th century, the author of the 
book Cosri, is distinguished for the striking and profound 
thoughts which he developes on this point. 

" The plural form of the word Elohim," says this writer, 
" is illustrated by regarding it as opposed to idolators, who, 
personifying the powers of nature, apply the singular to each 
one, and the plural to all combined, without keeping in view 



)und 

'iter, 



* The treatise of Hengstenberg may be found in his book before 
mentioned, vol. I. p. 181 — 414. It is entitled, "the divine names in the 
Pentateuch, die Gottesnamen im Pentateuch." 

f It. J. the Levite. See Wolf, Tom. IV. p. 1022, No. 25. 



INTRODUCTION'. 29 



a higher power from whom they all proceed. The term 
Elohim is in opposition to these. It is consequently the 
/most general name of the Deity, designating him in refe- 
rence to the fulness of his powers, without respect to per- 
sonality, moral properties, or any particular connexion with 
men. Hence it follows, that where God has given wit- 
ness of himself and is truly known, another name becomes 
connected with Elohim; and this is the name Jehovah, 
which belongs to the covenant people to whom God has re- 
vealed himself. The former term is general and common, 
the latter particular and proper. The one is unintelligible 
to all those to whom the development of the Divine Being 
which it bears along with it has not been made known ; the 
other, inasmuch as it designates God according as he is 
known to all men, is therefore generally intelligible. The 
name Jehovah, expressive as it is of the inward nature of 
the Deity, is only to be comprehended where this glorious 
Being has, as it were, gone out of himself; where he has 
opened the chambers of his heart, and granted a look within, 
so that instead of a dark indefinite somewhat, of which 
nothing more is known or can be predicated, than that it is 
mighty and excellent beyond all other things, the most per- 
sonal among all that are personal, the most clearly marked 
among all that are marked, comes forward." Far more cor- 
rectly and with deeper penetration than those who in mo- 
dern times consider the term Jehovah as designating the 
national God of the Jews, this writer understands it as the 
appellation of God as revealing himself, and consequently 
carries up its use to the origin of revelation itself, and there- 
fore to the very beginning of the human race. " The being 
who revealed himself to Adam, was designated by Adam 
himself as Jehovah." It was in a much later period, when the 
Divine Being limited his revelations to Israel, that the name 
became peculiar to that people. " The meaning implied in 



30 INTRODUCTION. 

the word God, (tPf&8i>) may be apprehended by a pr< 
cess of reasoning, because the understanding teaches us tha] 
the world has a ruler and director. But what is implied in 
the term Jehovah, (nirP : ,) cannot be thus apprehended, 
but only by prophetic vision, by which the man becomes 
separated, as it were, from his own species, and approxi- 
mates to that of angels. Another spirit enters into him ; 
preceding doubts of his heart are dissipated ; and his soul is 
filled with veneration and love for the one God, and rather 
than abandon them, he is willing to lay down his life." Cosri, 
Buxtorf's Translation, p. 256, ss. 

Maimonides, in his More Nevochim, Part I. chap. lxi. lxii. 
lxiii., in the edition in Hebrew, printed at Berlin in 1791, 4to, i 
fol. 56—60, (0-15,) in Buxtorf's Translation, p. 106— 115f 
and Abarbanel, as cited by Buxtorf in his Dissertation de 
nominibus Dei Hebraicis, p. 266, § 39, do also take notice If 
the distinction of the names employed to designate the Deity, 
but with less penetration than this author. 

The first writer, who made prominent the false exposition 
of the distinction in question, was the physician, Astruc, in 
his work before mentioned. Proceeding on the supposition \ 
that the alternate use of the divine names is not founded on 
any internal difference, a supposition which he never thought 
of proving, inasmuch as no one in his time questioned it, and, 
moreover, recognizing the truth, that such use could not be 
incidental, he attempted to explain it on external grounds., 
He maintained that Moses had composed the book of Gene- 
sis from various writings ; two principal documents, distin- 
guished by the exclusive use of Jehovah and Elohim, an] 
also ten particular memoirs, the use of which, however, waj 
limited to a very few portions of Genesis. 

This publication, at the time of its appearance, attracted\ 
very little attention. We learn this from the reply which I 
was made to it, five years afterwards, by H. Scharbau, Vin-- J 



■ 






INTRODUCTION. 31 

icise Geneseos contra auctorem anonymum libri, conjec- 
ires sur le Genese, which appeared in the Miscellanea Lu- 
>ecensia, vol. I. Rost. 1758, p. 39—106. The author apolo- 
gizes at length for having employed some of his leisure hours 
in refuting so very silly a system of conjectures, by appealing 
[ to La Croze, who condescended to write against Harduin's 
absurdities. He very correctly estimated the danger in 
Astruc's attempt, who, to support his theory respecting the 
| names, made great use of the unnecessary repetitions, the 
disorder and confusion, and the contradictions, which the 
book was said to contain. He treated the doctor as an ene- 
my of revelation. But for the main point, for the correct 
exposition of the facts, on the erroneous interpretation of 
which Astruc's theory was based, nothing was gained by the 
vindication. 

The period had not arrived for this theory to make im- 
pression, and it soon appeared to be buried in oblivion. But 
the times changed ; and the question, how an hypothesis 
agreed with the divine authority of the Scriptures, was no 
longer considered. Hence it was, that when Eichhorn, in 
his Introduction to the Old Testament, again advanced and 
/ set off this theory, it met with general acquiescence, and 
spread with extraordinary rapidity, so that few German 
scholars of any name were to be found who did not 
embrace it. 

It would be tedious to enumerate the various writers who 
defended this hypothesis, or to point out the differences be- 
tween Eichhorn, who maintained the theory of two docu- 
ments, and his chief follower, Ilgen, who defended that of 
three, and the various modifications introduced by others. 
These points have been already sufficiently noted on p. 
18. I proceed to take notice of those authors who opposed 
those views. 

Hasse deserves here to be honourably mentioned, mas- 



32 



INTRODUCTION. 






much as, in his Entdeckungen im Felde der altesten Erd- 
und Menschengeschichte Th. 2, Halle, 1805, he attacks the 
very fundamental principle of the theory, and maintains, that 
the alternate use of the names is founded on an internal dif- 
ference in the idea. But, in determining the meaning of the 
two names, his procedure is so arbitrary and strange, that 
an examination of his views would be labour without 
profit.* 

Vater did not meddle with the groundwork of the the- 
ory. In opposing the hypothesis of documents, he took care 
not to make the change of the divine names useless for that 
of fragments, to which he was attached. The work of 
Vater referred to, is his Commentary on the Pentateuch, 
Commentar iiber den Pentateuch. In Part II. p. 16, he ex- 
presses his opinion, that " the author of the fragment of Ex- 
odus," which contains vi. 3, " was unacquainted with Gen- 
esis ;" although, as Ewald says, in his work already noted, 
p. 9, "the representations and phraseology of the place are 
evidently drawn from it." To use the language of this wri- 
ter, " this is to cut the complicated knot with the sword of 
violence." The theory in question has but little to fear 
from such attacks as that of Vater. 

The first really important opposition is that which was 
made by Sack, in his treatise de usu nominum Dei G n !lb& 
et nifP in libro Geneseos, in the Commentationes ad theolo- 
giam historicam, Bonn, 1821 ; with which ought to be com- 
pared the remarks in the same writer's Apologetik, p. 157 ss. 

* In order that the reader may know that this remark of Hengstenberg 
is not made without good reason, it may be well to state, that Hasse 
maintains the extraordinary hypothesis, that the book of Genesis had in 
view the recommendation of agriculture. Jehovah consequently is pro- 
perly the god of agriculture, and therefore favourable to agriculturists. 
Of course, he is so to the Hebrews, to whom he would show himself 
as the only God, triumphing over all others! Such irreverent and 
unfounded theories are certainly unworthy of examination. 






INTRODUCTION. 33 

The discussion, so far as regards the main principle, the 
determining of the general relation between Jehovah and 
Elohim, was brought back again by him to the point at 
which the author of the book Cosri had left it ; and further, 
the attempt was made, and frequently with success, to ex- 
plain, in particular portions of Genesis, the use of the two 
names on the ground of their fundamental difference. 

A second more important attack on the hypothesis of 
documents and fragments was undertaken by Ewald, in his 
critical examination of Genesis. The chief value of this 
work consists in the ability with which it contends against 
the supposed fragmentary character and disorder of the 
composition, its inscriptions, repetitions, variety of language, 
and seeming contradictions. In showing the internal con- 
nexion of Genesis and the mutual relation of its parts, Ewald 
has great merit. But his investigations respecting the inter- 
change of the divine names are exceedingly defective, and 
far less valuable than those of Sack. He considers Elohim 
as the general and inferior name of the Deity, Jehovah as 
that of the national God of the Israelites. This view, 
which, without the necessary linguistic proof, is drawn 
merely from an induction of places taken from later his- 
torical books, although it contains some truth, is unsatis- 
factory. 

After mentioning the unimportant productions of Gram- 
berg* and STAEHELiN,f in reference to the theory opposed by 
Ewald, Hengstenberg takes notice of Hartmann. This writer 
defends the fragmentary theory, but attaches very little im- 
portance to the interchange of the names, although, indeed, 
he acknowledges a real difference between them. He gives 

* Libri Geneseos secundum fontes rite dignoscendos adumbratio 
nova. Leipz. 1828. 

f Kritische Untersuchungen iiber die Genesis, Basel. 1829, 
5 



34 INTRODUCTION. 

the result of his inquiries in these words : " When an 
author, without evident, definite cause, confines himself in 
a long section to the use of one name, whether it be Elohim 
or Jehovah, he shows a certain preference for it, and may 
therefore be regarded as a different writer from one who, 
in the same proportion, proceeds in a direction quite oppo- 
site." If now, an evident, definite cause can be shown, the 
conclusion of Hartmann falls to the ground. 

Ewald's latest view, as we learn from the review of 
Stahelin in the Studium und Criticum for 1831, Heft 3, is as 
follows : " The name Jehovah, as that of the Mosaic national 
God, may have been first imparted to the people by Moses, 
and associated with the national worship. In the period 
anterior to that of Moses, God may have been known by a 
general name, as Elohim ; or a historian may so designate 
him, in contradistinction to that of the Mosaic revelation. The 
first groundwork of the whole Pentateuch is formed by a 
writing, which, as far as Exod. vi. 2, always names God 
Elohim, according to the belief or tradition that the name 
Jehovah was first made known by Moses, and closely con- 
nected with the whole structure of Mosaic worship. Another 
writing is interwoven with this, which, less correct in the 
ancient application of terms, employs Jehovah, the Mosaic 
divine name, to designate the Deity in the patriarchal times, 
using also the term Elohim ; and thus portions occur in 
which Elohim appears exclusively, which is not the case 
with respect to Jehovah, unless incidentally. Those docu- 
ments have, with judicious connexion and thought, been in- 
corporated by a later writer into one, so that Genesis, in its 
present state, appears as the well connected work of some 
individual." 

But if the difference between Jehovah and Elohim was 
generally recognized by the people, how is it possible that 
two Israelites, the author of the second writing and the col- 



/ 






INTRODUCTION. 35 

lector, could commit so unfortunate a blunder as to employ 
the name of the national God in circumstances anterior to 
the national existence ? They could not possibly have re- 
garded it merely as the name of the national God. Another 
consideration, comprehending this idea, but not identical 
with it, will account for its use in periods before the time of 
Moses. 

Hengstenberg very justly remarks, that it is of the 
greatest importance to determine the derivation, and hence 
to ascertain the fundamental meaning of the terms under 
consideration. He begins with Jehovah, and settles the 
previous question, whether the word is of foreign or of 
Hebrew origin. He investigates the Egyptian and Phoeni- 
cian claims, and rejects them as inadmissible. The claim 
.set up for a Chinese origin, and the derivation from Jovis, 
.are hardly worthy of notice. The word is undoubtedly of 
Hebrew etymology. 

The learned writer then proceeds to examine the correct 
punctuation of the word. In his opinion, the vowels in 
present use were taken from Adonai. and the original pro- 
nunciation was yahveh, fTJiT (or, fll^P,) making the regular 
future of 5T151, and meaning the existing, literally, 'he will 
exist.' He considers Exod. iii. 14 : " and God said unto 
Moses, I am what I am," or ; ' I will be what I will be/ 
iTtt&fc "It!?^ *Tr^> as implying immutability. In the words of 
Augustin in loc. : " it is the name of unchangeableness. For 
all things that are mutable, cease to be what they were, and 
begin to be what they were not. Immutability is peculiar 
to essential truth. He has the property of existence to 
whom it is said, ' thou shalt change them, and they shall be 
changed, but thou art the same.' What is " I am that I 
am," but ' I am eternal' ? What is " I am that I am," but ' I 
cannot be changed' ?" i The existing,' and ' the unchanging,' 



\ 



36 INTRODUCTION. 

he considers as equivalent in meaning, and as conveying the 
sentiment of the text. 

Like Hengstenberg, Drechsler also examines the significa- 
tion of the two names, before he attempts to deduce any 
theory in reference to their use in the book of Genesis. In 
general views and results, those two scholars coincide. 
But the latter writer, proceeding, in his argument, from the 
same text in Exodus, comes to the conclusion, that Jehovah 
implies capability in himself. The words, " I will be what 
I will be," do not, he thinks, express the idea usually at- 
tached to them of immutability, but rather that of unlimited 
freedom. This, he maintains, accords with analogous usage, 
and refers to 2 Kings, viii. 1, " sojourn where thou will sojourn," 
ll^tl ntD^5 "Htt ; also to 2 Sam. xv. 20, and Gen. xliii. 14, 
which are less to the point. He considers the declarations 
in Exod. xxxiii. 19, Rom. ix. 15, "I will have mercy on 
whom I will have mercy," as entirely parallel to the words 
in Exodus iii. 14. Independent action and independent 
being may be considered as necessarily connected. On this 
ground, and in as much as the word ♦"WSS ' I will be,' or ' I 
am/ is used instead of the whole expression, Drechsler 
concludes that the thought thereby conveyed, is that of in- 
dependent being, p. 12. 

This thought is so closely allied to that given by Hengs- 
tenberg, that the practical application of both, in reference 
to the use of the divine names in Genesis, coincides. To de- 
termine their comparative philological correctness, would 
be of little importance. The commonly received exposition, 
which asserts immutability of character, inasmuch as itl 
accords with the simple meaning of the words, and com- 
prehends the idea of independent volition and action, is here 
presumed to be the true interpretation. Unlimited freedom 
in the formation of plans, and also in their execution, is thus 
necessarily implied in the declaration under consideration. 



INTRODUCTION. 37 

The word Elohim is, in all probability, derived from a 
root, which, although lost in the Hebrew, is still retained in 
the Arabic language, ftb&, '*ff, which not only means 'to 
worship God,' but also ' to be astonished, amazed, struck 
with fear.' Thus it conveys the idea of holy reverence and 
terror, analogous to the language in Gen. xxxi. 42, 53, where 
God is called " the fear of Isaac," meaning doubtless the ob- 
ject of his most sacred awe. Comp. Isa. viii. 13, " let him, 
(Jehovah,) be your fear and your dread." Thus Elohim may 
be regarded as a general term for God, implying his glory 
and dignity, as Creator, preserver and governor of all 
things, and by consequence exhibiting him as the great 
being, whom all his creatures are to honour and reverence, 
at the very thought of whose unlimited power all the uni- 
verse must tremble : the great and mighty God, in contra- 
distinction to the feeble and inefficient creature. 

Hengstenberg objects to the opinion, so anciently and fre- 
quently maintained, that the plural form implies plurality of 
persons. In that case, he thinks it could not be used of di- 
vine personages in the widest application, as of angels and 
supernatural beings, as it is in Ps. viii. 5 ; 1 Sam. xxviii. 13 ; 
and also of idols. But, without deciding in favour of the 
opinion referred to, it may be said, that whenever the term 
is so used, that original ground of the plural form might be 
lost sight of. This is the case in a multitude of words, as 
their meaning varies in proportion to the extensiveness of 
their application. And it is the case in English when we 
apply the word God to denote a false god, an evil being, al- 
though originally it implied goodness, as a characteristic ne- 
cessarily belonging to the being so designated. 

If it is clear, that the Pentateuch contains a revelation of 
God progressively advancing, until it terminates in a de- 
velopement of the complete theocracy ; then, from the inti- 
mate connexion of name and thing, we may reasonably ex- 



38 INTRODUCTION. 

pect that the author, by the use of designed and carefully- 
varied divine names, intended to note a real difference 
characteristic of the earlier and later periods. If Elohim 
be the more general, and Jehovah the more definite and 
profound name of the Deity, we might consequently expect 
to find, that the use of these terms varies, before the full 
establishment of the theocracy, in a different manner from 
what it does after. According as the subject is connected 
with the earlier or later period, in other words, as the anal- 
ogy with the world in general or with the theocracy pre- 
dominates, the name Jehovah or Elohim must be employed. 
As the name indicates character, the language in Ex. vi. 3, 
"by my name Jehovah," is equivalent to 'in my character 
as Jehovah.' The reference is not to the mere name, but to 
the thing designated. " You shall know that I am Jehovah, 
your God ;" you shall know it by the wonderful deliverance 
from Egypt. Such a developement of divine power was 
never made to the patriarchs, and indeed, from the nature 
of the case, it could not have been. This text determines 
nothing respecting the age of the term Jehovah. It speaks 
of the revelation of God as Jehovah. Thus far the same 
being, who, in one respect, was Jehovah, in another has 
always been Elohim. Now, the great catastrophe ap- 
proaches, by which Jehovah-Elohim becomes or displays 
himself as Jehovah. 

Thus Hengstenberg. Drechsler also maintains that the use 
of the two names rests on grounds connected with the sub- 
ject, and that the difference in such use observable in Gene- 
sis from that found in other books of the Old Testament, is 
not to be ascribed to mere arbitrariness on the part of the 
writer, but arises from its peculiar character of the contents, 
which bears an especial relation to one or other of the divine 
names, as either may be found to have been employed. He 
then remarks as follows. 






INTRODUCTION. 39 

"If, in order to discover the object which this varying 
usage has in view, we examine the other books of the Pen- 
tateuch, it will appear that the same usage prevails in these 
as is to be found in the later historical writings. In the 
first four chapters of Deuteronomy, in eighty-one instances 
where the Supreme Being is mentioned, the term Elohim 
occurs only seven times. 

" Further, the important fact is not to be omitted, that, in 
other books besides Genesis, where the name Jehovah pre- 
dominates, Elohim is used exclusively in sections of consi- 
derable length. This is the case in Jud. ix. and 2 Sam. ix. 
And, as might naturally be expected, instances of the con- 
trary usage are also to be found. 

" It has been stated that an examination of passages proves 
the word Jehovah to be much more frequently used than the 
other. This might have been expected, as it designates God 
as having revealed himself. And, inasmuch as the Israelitish 
people constituted the scene of his operations, their existence, 
and the condition of it, both civil and ecclesiastical, compre- 
hending their institutions and whole manner of life, were the 
result of his revelations. Consequently the name Jehovah 
must have been all-important to the Israelites. It is unne- 
cessary therefore to inquire under what circumstances this 
term would be employed, but when the other might or must 
be used. 

" This general term, Elohim, referring to the Creator, is 
in contradistinction to the name Jehovah ; which refers to 
him as having made a revelation of himself. See Deut. iv. 
32 — 40 : * For ask now of the days that are past, which 
were before thee, since the day that God created man upon 
the earth, and ask from the one side of heaven unto the other, 
whether there hath been any such thing as this great thing 
is, or hath been heard like it ? Did ever people hear the 
voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou 



40 INTRODUCTION. 

hast heard, and live ? Or hath God assayed to go and take 
him a nation from the midst of another nation, by temptations, 
by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty 
hand, and by a stretched-out arm, and by great terrors, ac- 
cording to all that Jehovah your God did for you in Egypt 
before your eyes? Unto thee it was shewed, that thou 
mightest know that Jehovah he is God ; there is none else 
besides him. Out of heaven he made thee to hear his voice, 
that he might instruct thee : and upon earth he shewed thee 
his great fire ; aad thou heardest his words out of the midst 
of the fire. And because he loved thy fathers, therefore 
he chose their seed after them, and brought thee out in his 
sight with his mighty power out of Egypt ; to drive out 
nations from before thee, greater and mightier than thou art, 
to bring thee in, to give thee their land for an inheritance, 
as it is this day. Know therefore this day, and consider 
it in thine heart, that Jehovah he is God in heaven above, 
and upon the earth beneath : there is none else. Thou 
shalt keep therefore his statutes, and his commandments, 
which I command thee this day, that it may go well with 
thee, and with thy children after thee, and that thou mayest 
prolong thy days upon the earth, which Jehovah thy God 
giveth thee, for ever.' Compare also 1 Kings, xviii. 24: 
4 And call ye on the name of your gods, and I will call on the 
name of Jehovah : and the God that answereth by fire, let 
him be God. And all the people answered and said, It is 
well spoken,' In these and other cases, God, as he is in his 
nature, is distinguished from God as having revealed himself. 
Elsewhere this difference is not essential, and then the two 
expressions imply no contradistinction, and may be used in- 
differently, as is the case in many places." p. 9, 10, 17, 20. 

The term Elohim, then, is the general designation of the 
glorious maker, preserver, and governor of the universe, the 
great and dreadful God, a proper estimate of whose attri- 






INTRODUCTION. 41 

butes must fill the mind of every intelligent creature with 
reverential awe, the more profound in proportion as those 
attributes are truly understood and appreciated. The other 
word, Jehovah, designating the same eternal and infinite 
being, has a particular bearing. God is contemplated as 
having a grand and ultimate object in view. To accom- 
plish this, he displays himself with different degrees of clear- 
ness as a being without the possibility of change, and with 
infinite freedom of volition and of action. In this light he is 
Jehovah ; and in this light, his revelations and actions to- 
wards his people are proper exhibitions of him as the un- 
changeable and the infinite. 

If, now, a clearly marked difference of meaning in the 
terms themselves, and also a clearly marked difference of 
object on the part of the writer, are the general grounds of 
the varying usage under consideration, the gain to the truth 
as historically transmitted is considerable. The inference, 
which at one time w r as drawn without hesitation, namely, 
that the fact indicates different authors, is evidently un- 
founded. The same writer may have chosen different terms, 
as, in his judgment, the one or the other harmonized the 
better with the character of the accompanying contents. 

But still the question arises, is this the invariable ground 
of the usage ? Are there no cases where either term might 
have been employed without weakening the impression de- 
signed to be conveyed by the narrations in connexion with 
which one of them is used ? I am compelled to express the 
opinion, that there are. It is manifest to me, that in several 
places either term might have been chosen, and, as it would 
seem, without affecting even in the slightest degree the in- 
fluence of the connected portion on the mind of the reader. 
However true the principle laid down may be as the gene- 
ral ground of the usage, the two learned authors referred to 
appear to me occasionally to carry the application of it un- 
6 



42 INTRODUCTION. 

warrantably far. They sometimes make the sacred writer 
scrupulously and minutely particular in the choice of his 
terms, at the expense of simplicity and nature. Jehovah 
and Elohim, which, although differing in primary meaning, 
do, it is allowed, designate the same God, may sometimes 
be used as proper names, without regard to their original or 
etymological meanings, just as Jesus and Christ are ordi- 
narily used by Christians, and occasionally in the New 
Testament. 

I proceed now to take a cursory view of the application 
of these terms respectively in some of the most important 
portions of the book of Genesis. This will afford me an oc- 
casion of illustrating the remark just made, and give the 
reader an opportunity of judging of its correctness. 

Genesis commences with an account of the creation, and 
consequently Elohim is the more suitable word. At the pe- 
riod here referred to, God had not appeared as Jehovah, re- 
vealing himself to his creature. It is only in his general 
connexion with the whole universe that he is here brought 
forward as the Almighty, the creator of all, and conse- 
quently superior to all. The Hebrew, in speaking of the 
creation, could undoubtedly have used the term Jehovah to 
designate the creator, inasmuch as both this term and the 
other represented the same object to his mind. And hence 
we find it repeatedly thus employed, as in Ex. xx. 11; xxxi. 
17 ; Ps. viii. 1 ; xxxiii. 6 ; civ. 16, 24 ; Isa. xlii. 5. But in 
the first introduction of an account of the creation, the author 
very judiciously places himself, as it were, in the very time 
of the act, and therefore mentions the Divine Maker under 
the name which is particularly appropriate to the subject. 
" The heavens declare the glory of God ;" and it is "the law 
of Jehovah" which is said to be "perfect." Ps. xix. 1, 7. 

Man, originally good, in the direction of all his powers to 
God, is the subject of what follows. Consequently Elohim 



/ 



INTRODUCTION. 43 

appears as Jehovah, thus making his connexion with man 
the subject of positive revelation. The combination of the 
two terms is to show that the same being is intended 
by both. 

The supposition that the second chapter contains a second 
history of the creation different from the former comprised 
in the first chapter, is founded on a misapprehension of its 
meaning. It is not a history of the creation ; it merely con- 
tains historical information introductory to what follows in 
the third chapter. 

These brief observations sufficiently explain the ground of 
the usage in the second and third chapters. But for the 
reader's satisfaction, I add the following abridged remarks 
of Hengstenberg. ' Both names are here used, thus imply- 
ing that the being designated by each is one, that the true 
Elohim is Jehovah, and that Jehovah is really Elohim. 
Sometimes the exclusive use of one followed by an exclu- 
sive use of the other, implies the same thing, as is the case 
in the book of Jonah. In the portion under consideration, 
the name Jehovah is that which is best adapted to the na- 
ture of the contents. The living God, revealing himself to 
his creatures, is now manifested. He appears as the affec- 
tionate guardian of men, the disposer of moral life, command- 
ing and prohibiting, threatening punishment, and opening 
before the mind the restoration which shall be hereafter. If 
the author had had in view those only who had attained to 
a clear recognition of the connexion of Elohim and Jehovah, 
the latter term alone would have been sufficient. But, inas- 
much as he rather aims first to intimate the grounds of the 
connexion of Jehovah and Elohim, the transition from the 
use of the latter term to that of the former alone would 
have been too rapid. He wished to avoid the misapprehen- 
sion, which would be implied in the supposition, that the 
God who dealt so humanely with men might be a different 






44 INTRODUCTION. 

person from the creator of heaven and earth, a merely infe- 
rior God and mediator. He therefore here uses the two 
terms in connexion, in order that, in subsequent portions, 
when Jehovah or Elohim occurs alone, the reader may 
immediately recognize the truth that the one implies also 
the other. 

The general character of these chapters requires the use 
of Jehovah. But, apart from this consideration, Elohim 
might have been used in particular places with equal pro- 
priety. It might have been said of God, as well as of the 
Lord God, "he had not caused it to rain upon the earth." 
But, as this notice is preparatory to the account afterwards 
to be related of the establishment of Paradise, it represents 
God's affectionate care for man in preparing him a residence 
even before he was called into existence. The same princi- 
ple explains the usage elsewhere. 

It follows from what has been said, that the use of the 
two terms in combination must be limited to the author. 
Consequently, we do not find it in the language ascribed to 
the serpent and the woman, because it would be inconsis- 
tent with the nature of the temptation, and also with such a 
state of mind as would give it consideration.' 

This view of the matter, as it accounts for the variable 
use of the names, destroys the hypothesis of particular docu- 
ments, designated each by its own respective term. 

Elohim has now appeared as Jehovah. This, therefore, 
becomes in the fourth chapter the predominant term. The 
other might, indeed, in most places have been used with 
propriety, but this is particularly appropriate, as the of- 
ferings of Cain and Abel were made to Jehovah. The 
use of Elohim in v. 25, " for God hath appointed me another 
seed," compared with that of Jehovah in v. 1, "I have 
gotten a man from the Lord," where the subject is the same, 
requires no laboured exposition, The author implies that 



INTRODUCTION. 45 

each term is equally expressive of the same Divine Being, 
" the giver of every good gift." 

Both the writers before mentioned appear to be fanciful in 
assigning reasons for the difference in these two verses. 
Drechsler supposes that the choice of Elohim in v. 25, 
marks the opposition between God and man. " God re- 
places in the person of Seth, what Cain had attempted to 
destroy in that of Abel :" p. 86. Hengstenberg maintains 
that a different word from that used in the first verse marks 
the state of the mothers mind. " At the first birth, her 
consciousness of the divine presence and being is particu- 
larly vivid. By inflicting punishment, God had shown him- 
self to be Jehovah ; as Jehovah also is he recognized in the 
benefit. In the birth of her first son, Eve discovers a dear 
pledge of his favour. At that of Seth, this feeling is not 
a little qualified. She merely recognizes a general divine 
influence ; and the naturalness of the event does not, as on 
the first occasion, appear to her entirely in the back ground." 
This inference, founded on such slight premises, will not be 
considered as receiving much support from the language of 
Leah, to which the author appeals, although he chooses to 
conclude that " the correctness of the exposition is conse- 
quently indubitable." p. 320. He gives no references, but I 
presume he alludes to the language of xxix. 31-35, compared 
with that of xxx. 17, 20. 

The indiscriminate application of a true theory, without 
a due regard to exceptions and limitations, by which every 
theory on such a subject must be modified, appears also in the 
remarks of one at least, if not both of these writers, on the 
next portion of the book of Genesis. 

' In the whole account of the flood,' says Drechsler, ' Elo- 
him and Jehovah are both used, the former term, however, 
greatly preponderating. And this is very proper, as the 
subject relates to mankind in general, and not particularly to 



46 INTRODUCTION. 

God's church. A second creation, as it were, is related, 
and the ninth chapter evidently refers to the first. Comp. ix. 
1, 7, with i. 22, 28 ; ix. 2, with i. 26 ; ix. 3, with i. 29, 30/ 
See p. 103. 

This may be allowed to be natural and reasonable. But 
how does the author account for the exceptions to the use 
of Elohim ? 

In vi. 6, 7, Jehovah occurs. " It repented the Lord" — 
" and the Lord said." " Here God makes his determination, 
a determination which is founded on his merciful intention 
to redeem fallen man: therefore Jehovah is used." p. 104. 
Extraordinary reason truly ! The excision of the race of 
men then existing may, indeed, have been necessary to pre- 
pare the way for the accomplishment of this intention ; but 
surely the determination to cut them off does not even inti- 
mate such an intention. " But the execution of the deter- 
mination accords best with the general idea of the creator." 
Ibid. Elohim is consequently employed. On this theory, 
we might certainly expect to find Jehovah in vi. 22, where 
we read : " according to all that God commanded Noah, so 
did he." In fact, this term does occur in vii. 5, " that the 
Lord commanded him" ; and here the author remarks, that 
" the highly favoured Noah must exercise obedience, blind 
obedience enjoined by an absolute, positive law.* Therefore, 
Jehovah." p. 105. But on this ground, vi. 22, and vii. 5, would 
both require Jehovah, since both are equally commands. 

An outline of Hengstenberg's remarks must now be given. 

Gen. vi — ix. Ewald considers this portion of the book 
as of the highest importance, in its bearing on the theory 
of two documents, characterized by the use of Elohim and 
Jehovah.f It is therefore worthy of particular attention. 

* " Blinden Gehorsam durch ein willkuhrliches, positives Gebot." 
f Komp. der Genesis, p. 81. 



INTRODUCTION. 47 

* vi. 1-8 forms a sort of introduction, stating the cause of 
the divine judgments. With the exception of the phrase 
" sons of God," Jehovah is invariably and frequently* em- 
ployed. The subsequent narrative shows an abundant use 
of the term Elohim ; though Jehovah is several times unex- 
pectedly introduced, as in vii. 1, 5 and 16, immediately after 
Elohim, and in viii. 20, 21, ix. 26, immediately followed by 
it. Ewald takes no notice of this difficulty, and Sack's ex- 
position is unsatisfactory/ p. 324-326. 

" It is the author's purpose to show how Elohim gradually 
became [manifested himself as] Jehovah. He has already 
taken the first step, and has the second in contemplation. 
The history of Abraham is pretty closely connected with 
the account of the flood ; for in the intermediate portion the 
divine names occur but seldom, and the subjects are of such 
a character throughout as to make the use of Elohim inad- 
missible. If now the author, before entering on this new 
and important section of his work, wished, by the use of the 
divine names, to call his readers' attention to this point, that 
the being who had already been exhibited as Jehovah was 
still in a considerable degree Elohim, and that consequently 
new and more glorious discoveries and revelations were 
still to be unfolded, this must necessarily be done in the 
portion under consideration, in which the very frequent 
use of the divine names must prevent his purpose from 
being hid. 

" If the author had employed Elohim from the beginning, 
[of this portion,] one aspect of the truth would have re- 
mained concealed, namely this, that God was in a consider- 
able degree already Jehovah, and displayed himself as such 
in the whole of this great occasion. He therefore in the 
introduction employs Jehovah frequently and with evident 

* Only five times, including v. 5. 






48 INTRODUCTION. 

design. Consequently Elohim, which occurs so often in the 
subsequent representation, partly in reference to actions in 
connexion with which Jehovah had immediately before been 
made prominent, could not be misunderstood. The intro- 
duction shows that Elohim is not to be taken merely in the 
abstract, but that it implies this transition to Jehovah, who, 
in connexion with what follows, is still Elohim." p. 327, 328. 

Hengstenberg then proceeds to give reasons why the 
term Elohim, which occurs in vi. 2, 4, and also Jehovah, 
where it appears after vi. 8, should be considered as excep- 
tions to the view just stated. 

After an examination of the meaning of the phrase, " sons 
of God," in this place, which he shows cannot be explained 
of angels, but only in reference to truly religious men, he 
remarks, that they are called 'sons of God 9 rather than of 
Jehovah, in contradistinction to the daughters of men, in 
accordance with ordinary usage, which employs the most 
general designation of the Supreme Being, when heaven and 
earth, God and man, are set in opposition to each other. 
Apart from this consideration, however, he thinks there is 
another reason in favour of the use of Elohim, as the dignity 
implied in the phrase 'sons of Jehovah' would be too great 
for the existing developement of the divine purposes. Such 
a glory must be reserved for a subsequent age. See Deut. 
xiv. 1,2. p. 332.* 

' The commencement of the 7th chapter, vers. 1, 5, is the 
proper place to note the fact, that the same being who in some 
respects is still Elohim simply, is in other very weighty ones 
Jehovah ; and thus the usage in vi. 1 — 8, is recalled to the 
reader's mind. We stand here on the very verge of the 
great catastrophe. The authority of Jehovah determines 

* Drechsler has no difficulty on this point, as, in common with many 
Jewish and Christian writers, he understands the phrase in question of 
angels, p. 91—93. 






INTRODUCTION. 49 

the numerical preference which Noah was to give to the 
clean beasts in opposition to the unclean, inasmuch as offer- 
ings were selected exclusively from the former, and these 
offerings were made to Jehovah. The previous command 
respecting the beasts proceeds* from the general care of the 
creator for their preservation ; this particular supplementary 
order,f on the contrary, appertains properly to the Deity, as 
making himself personally known, that is, as Jehovah. It is 
not the difference between clean and unclean that is pecu- 
liarly connected with the use of Jehovah, for this distinction 
occurs in connexion with the use of Elohim, (vii. 8, 9 ;) it is 
only the solicitude to provide the larger number, which is 
ascribed to Jehovah. 

In vii. 16, the use of Elohim marks God's care for the 
creatures in general, while that of Jehovah intimates his 
merciful intentions towards Noah, " who had found grace in 
his eyes." " When Jehovah shut the door after Iiim, all the 
waters of heaven and earth became incapable of forcing an 
entrance." 

In viii. 20, 21, Jehovah is entirely appropriate, as it is 
the account of an offering. The interchange of the terms 
in ix. 26, 27, — " blessed be the Lord God of Shem ; God 
shall enlarge Japheth," — is easily explained. The connex- 
ion of the two verses illustrates the connexion, which the au- 
thor indirectly points out, of the two names to each other. 
Jehovah is the God of the Shemites, while the association 
of Japheth is simply with Elohim. The equality, as it re- 
spects the divine connexion, which has heretofore existed, is 
to cease, and Elohim will manifest himself, in union with the 
family of Shem, as Jehovah.' 

Hengstenberg remarks further, that, if the theory main- 

* He refers to vi. 19, 20. 
f Alluding to vii. 2. 
7 



50 INTRODUCTION. 

tained by him be true, the use of the two names may be 
satisfactorily accounted for, wherever they occur in the 
whole section. Thus the blessing, which in ix. 1 ss., is im- 
parted to Noah by God, relates to natural benefits which are 
of a general character, and is a repetition of that which fol- 
lowed the creation, a blessing which the flood seemed to 
have swept away. Hence the use of Elohim. The same 
principle is applied by him to the subsequent use of the term 
in this chapter. 

He concludes with the observation, that in the phrase, 
"Noah walked with God" in vi. 9, no other appellation 
would have been equally apposite, inasmuch as it designates 
his character in contradistinction to that of his ungodly con- 
temporaries : " not with them, but with God, did Noah 
walk." p. 328—336. 

Leaving the reader to form his own judgment on the pro- 
priety of carrying out the author's theory to the extent 
here developed, I must be allowed to say, that occasion- 
ally its application wants that simplicity which the mind 
would naturally desire. Admitting its general truth, it may 
be carried unreasonably far. Circumstances merely inci- 
dental may induce the writer to use the one term or the 
other, where no very important cause existed to lead to a 
preference. The phrase, "Noah walked with God" may 
be founded on the reason just given ; but if the author in- 
tended to state immediately afterwards that " the earth was 
corrupt before God" and that "God looked upon it, and 
behold, it was corrupt," surely we need go no further for a 
reason. And the natural phraseology would be that which 
follows: "and God said unto Noah," v. 13. Comp. v. 24: 
" Enoch walked with God" and " God took him," with v. 1, 
" God created ;" " in the likeness of God" Still the phrase 
is probably used with the view of indicating that the mind 
and heart both of Noah and Enoch were drawn away, in 



INTRODUCTION. 51 

an unusual degree, from all created objects to that holy and 
spiritual being by whom they had been called into exist- 
ence. — In vi. 22, which refers to the determination expressed 
in 13, and the consequent command to Noah, we would 
naturally expect the same divine term to be used, indepen- 
dently of any reason connected with the original meaning of 
the word. Immediately afterwards, the Deity appears as 
Noah's covenant God to whom he had revealed himself, and 
consequently Jehovah is the term used. See vii. 1, 5. The 
9th and 16th verses of the same chapter manifestly refer 
back to vi. 22, and therefore the word Elohim is chosen to 
express God's commanding; while, in the 16th verse, Noah's 
covenant God of revelation discloses his character and rela- 
tion in the favour implied in the words, "Jehovah shut 
him in." 

Without an examination of the work of Sack above re- 
ferred to, to which I have not access, I am led to infer, from 
Hengstenberg's brief notice of his view, that it coincides with 
the one just given ; although he rejects it, as manifestly un- 
satisfactory, (ofFenbar unzureichend. p. 326.) 'When Noah 
is said to walk with God, the general idea of the divine life 
is intended to be expressed. The subsequent revelations 
therefore are not attributed to Jehovah, to whom they pro- 
perly belonged, but to Elohim, because connected with the 
decision just declared respecting Noah, that he walked with 
God, "quia adjunctae sunt illi judicio de Noacho eunte coram 
deo." ' I am not aware that any objections have been or 
can be urged against such a view as this, which involve any 
difficulty of moment. 

As the principle laid down, and the modifications of it 
which have been proposed, are sufficient to account for the 
interchange of the terms in question in the whole of this sec- 
tion, it is proper to pass on to other portions of the book of 
Genesis. 



52 INTRODUCTION. 

Nimrod is called " a mighty hunter before Jehovah." 
x. 9. If the term ' hunter' is employed, as is most probable, 
to denote this person's oppression and tyrannical character, 
then the phrase " before Jehovah" implies the insolence and 
audacity of the man. See the note on the place. He is not 
to be restrained by the presence of the infinite himself. The 
choice of the term whereby this infinite being is denoted, 
would seem to be a matter of indifference. The author 
might have used Elohim or Jehovah, without any shade of 
difference in the general meaning, as either would equally 
convey the idea of Nimrod's impudent and licentious ty- 
ranny. Hengstenberg has failed to make out his assertion that 
" Jehovah and not Elohim is to be justified in this place" ; 
for either term would be appropriate. True, indeed, the 
rebellious Nimrod " could neither escape the eye of the 
living God, which was directed towards him, nor avoid 
his hand." But if there be any such " deep irony" in the 
phrase " before Jehovah," as that writer supposes, I am at a 
loss to see why it should not be allowed to lurk under the 
other phrase, ' before God,' with equal certainty. See p. 
337, 339. It may be, indeed, that the author of the book of 
Genesis, both here and elsewhere, selects the term Jehovah 
in preference to Elohim, in order to intimate that the God 
of his covenant people had his eye on bold and flagrant 
offenders, and would visit them with condign punishment, 
either with the view of furthering his plans towards that 
people, or of chastising individual offenders among them. 
(The latter part of the remark would apply to the cases of 
Er and Onan, mentioned in xxxviii. 7, 10.) But we should 
take care not to carry out this theory to any greater ex- 
tent than the specific character of the cases may warrant. 
Ewald has certainly violated this principle, in saying that 
" it is Jehovah alone who gives laws ; that, according to the 
constant use of language, men can sin against Jehovah only, 



INTRODUCTION. 53 

and not against Elohim ; and that it is Jehovah only who 
threatens punishment." p. 95. Gen. vi. 22. vii. 9, 16, where 
Elohim " commands" Noah, and xxxix. 9, where Joseph 
speaks of " sinning against Elohim," contradict his as- 
sertion. 

Hengstenberg's undeviating adherence to his theory has 
an evident influence on his estimate of the religious know- 
ledge and character of the various personages brought be- 
fore us in the book of Genesis. Thus, for instance, it affects 
his portrait of Melchisedek. This distinguished king and 
priest, who is affirmed in the seventh chapter of the He- 
brews to have been greater than Abraham himself, the 
patriarch, refers to the Deity as " the most high God, the 
possessor of heaven and earth." Gen. xiv. 19. But, to 
this representation of the supreme being, Abraham prefixes 
the term Jehovah, v. 22, " and this must have been intended 
to show that Abraham has more than Melchisedek, whatever 
they may have held in common. The God of the latter is 
not merely one [among others], but he is the highest, whose 
authority extends over the whole world. Justice and love 
are in him combined with omnipotence, and his parti- 
cular providence protects the pious and upright. But this 
view of religion, however pure, is yet imperfect. In the 
highest God, the lord of heaven and earth, Melchisedek has 
still not recognized Jehovah. As such, his exhibitions are 
confined to Abraham, in the way of especial revelation. In 
the earlier history of mankind, Jehovah, both in name and 
thing, is common good of the whole human race, and before 
the calling of Abraham, a man of the religious earnestness 
of Melchisedek would have recognized and named him, 
even if it were imperfectly." p. 344, 345. To the same 
effect, and if possible more plainly, does the author speak 
in Vol. II. p. 554. " Melchisedek is recognized by Abraham 
as a priest of the true God, as some centuries after Moses 



54 INTRODUCTION. 

was allied with Jethro, by the bond of religious community. 
Yet it is a heathenish religiousness, (eine heidnische Reli- 
giosity,) S^rib^ ^$*lV' And where is the proof, that a 
holy man like Melchisedek, dignified in the offices which he 
sustained, and chiefly illustrious as a type of the great high 
priest and king of his people, and a wise man like Jethro, 
whose counsel the great and inspired Hebrew legislator him- 
self did not disdain to follow, cultivated a sort of heathenish 
religion, or failed to regard the God whom they worshipped 
and obeyed as the true Jehovah ? The author's assertion, 
that " the more God becomes Jehovah for Abraham, the 
more does he become Elohim for all the rest of the world," 
allowing it to be generally true, is not universally so ; and 
surely Melchisedek may well be considered as the most 
prominent of all exceptions. It should not be forgotten, that 
the covenant with Abraham could not annul God's pre- 
viously made covenant with Noah, and in him with all man- 
kind, ix. 9 ss. 

'In chap, xvii,' says Drechsler, 'Jehovah is used in v. 1, 
and afterwards Elohim constantly, because the subject re- 
lated is, as it were, a creation of a people from nothing, and 
therefore a powerful proof of the efficiency of God, who is 
for the first time described as "God Almighty," ^tf b&, v. 1, 
for which, in subsequent verses, where Isaac's birth is pro- 
mised, and also in xxi, where it is narrated, Elohim is used. 
Those chapters share in one category with the first chapter.' 
p. 189, 190. 

' Elohim is used in chap, xvii, and Jehovah in chap, xviii. 
But, although the general subject is the same, there are 
some points of difference which suggest the reason of the 
varying use of these appellations. Chapter xvii contains the 
promise of the birth of a son, as the commencing point of 
the long and great work of the creation of a numerous peo- 
ple ; xviii speaks merely of the birth of this son the follow- 



INTRODUCTION. 55 

ing year. The former is the solemn, I may say public, 
act ; the latter contains private discourse. Abraham, as the 
father of a m altitude of nations, and this great posterity to 
descend from him, constitute the leading idea of xvii, which 
may be said to be its perfect legal instrument, an act of 
official character. But in xviii, this subject is only oppor- 
tunely introduced ; for it was not on account of this matter, 
but a different one, that Jehovah showed himself in action, 
and he holds intercourse with Abraham and Sarah only as 
private persons.' p. 191, 192. 

To me, all this appears to be refined and arbitrary. It 
assumes a gratuitous and unfounded distinction, which seems 
to have been devised in order to sustain a preconceived 
theory. Either appellation is sufficiently adapted to the 
subject, and it would seem unnecessary to investigate very 
deeply for a motive which might lead to the choice of one 
in preference to the other. The interchange, both here and 
elsewhere, may be intended to impress the reader with the 
conviction, that the same infinite and immutable being is 
denoted by each. This principle sufficiently illustrates the 
usage in the 19th chapter. 

In chap, xx, Elohim is the prevailing term. Here the 
reason is plain. The narrative makes us acquainted with 
persons who had no other idea of God than what is implied 
in that word ; and even that idea was very imperfect. 
" The fear of God in this place," is all that Abraham could 
reasonably conceive of. The name intimates also that the 
patriarch was under the protection of that glorious being 
who created the world ; and it was the divine intention in 
the narrative, to make this truth conspicuous both to his 
contemporaries and also to future generations. The unex- 
pected introduction of Jehovah in the last verse points out 
the identity of the being designated by the two names. 

In xxi Elohim is used, except in v. 1, 33. The author 



56 INTRODUCTION. 

has evidently a reference to chap, xvii, in which the usage 
is strikingly similar, Jehovah being employed in the first 
verse, and Elohim always afterwards. The subject also 
corresponds, the one portion containing the accomplishment 
of what is promised in the other. Comp. xxi. 2, 3, 4, 5, with 
xvii. 21, 19, 10 — 12, 17; also, what is said in each chapter 
of Isaac and Ishmael respectively. The author of xxi has 
undoubtedly in his mind the contents of xvii. The same 
motive, then, which gives rise to the choice of the divine 
names in the one, may fairly be presumed to account for it 
in the other. It would therefore seem unnecessary at least, 
to assume with Drechsler, (p. 194,) that Elohim is used, 
when the subject relates to Ishmael, because the blessings 
promised to him had reference merely to God's omnipotence 
and creative power, exclusive of any covenant relation com- 
prehending positive revelations. This reason would not 
apply to the choice of this appellation when Abraham or 
Isaac is the subject of discourse ; and, in all probability, the 
author's motive is the same in both cases. Certainly, as 
Drechsler says, Abraham is commanded to " cast out" his 
son, by God as ruler of the world, in contradistinction to 
man, who had neither the right to issue nor the power to 
enforce such an order, and consequently Elohim is fitly cho- 
sen. But it is undeniable, that the expulsion had a direct 
and intimate relation to the divine plan concerning Abra- 
ham, and therefore the word Jehovah would have been 
equally proper. 

Doubtless, the name Jehovah is chosen in the first verse 
to express God's covenant relation to the mother of the child 
of promise. But to me it seems fanciful, to account, as 
Hengstenberg does, for the use of Elohim, which immediately 
follows, (v. 2,) on the ground, that it points out "the opposi- 
tion between God's word and man's word." The differ- 
ence between the language ' God' and * angel of God' in 



INTRODUCTION. 57 

v. 9 — 21, and 'Jehovah' and 'angel of Jehovah' in xvi. 7 ss., 
while the subject is the same in both places, he attributes to 
"the great diversity of the relations which resulted from the 
birth of Isaac. Heretofore, as Ishmael's circumcision shows, 
Hagar and he had, in some degree, formed a part of the 
chosen family, and consequently had participated in its con- 
nexion with Jehovah. With the declaration of God in v. 
12, 'in Isaac shall thy seed be called,' they go out of the 
province of Jehovah into that of Elohim. The outer sepa- 
ration from the chosen race was only a manifestation of that 
which had already taken place within. After this final sepa- 
ration, they had as little connexion with Jehovah as Cain, 
when he departed from the church of God in Eden and be- 
took himself to the land of Nod. If in v. 20, the language 
was ' and Jehovah? instead of ' and God was with the lad,' 
it would be an express contradiction of what is declared in 
v. 12." p. 354. 

An examination of the view here assumed respecting Ish- 
mael's exclusion from all covenant relation with Jehovah, 
would be foreign to my present purpose. I have only* to 
remark, that, were it allowed to be correct, it would not 
explain the use of Elohim in v. 12, where it is clear that 
either this term or Jehovah would be equally appropriate. 

The use of the divine names in the next chapter is easily 
explained. God, (Elohim,) the maker and the owner, re- 
quires Abraham to give up his son, and, in the very turning 
point of the transaction, Jehovah, by his angel, prevents the 
sacrifice, and manifests himself as the patriarch's covenant 
God. Comp. v. 1, with 11, 12. That the change of names 
in this narrative is attributable to the circumstance of its 
being composed of two original documents, is ridiculous. 
This would have produced a mechanical piece of patch- 
work, whereas the account is remarkable for its consistency 
and unity. It requires no extraordinary perspicuity, in order 
8 



58 INTRODUCTION. 

to enable the reader to perceive the propriety of the choice 
of terms whereby to denote the supreme being. But when 
Hengstenberg telis us, that the patriarch's " temptation would 
have had no object, if God had already become for him ab- 
solutely Jehovah," (p. 358,) he seems to have forgotten that 
" the Son" himself, whom the father had declared by " a 
voice from heaven" to be his " beloved" one, was tried by 
the severest temptations. " Jehovah," the " merciful and gra- 
cious," might subject his " friend"* to such a test, with the 
view of strengthening his faith, and of exhibiting his obe- 
dience to the imitation of all subsequent ages. 

The remarks already made will enable the reader to ex- 
plain the usage in the chapters immediately following. 

In xxv. 11, it is said, that "God, (Elohim,) blessed Abra- 
ham's son Isaac." Undoubtedly, either this term or the 
other is equally appropriate. But, says the author just 
named, "we find Elohim in this place, where it would seem, 
at the first look, that Jehovah ought to stand. Still, if we 
consider that the notice here is merely occasional and preli- 
minary, and that the author does not professedly enter on 
the history of Isaac until v. 19 ss., the term Elohim will ap- 
pear perfectly satisfactory. It conveys here the general in- 
timation, that the blessing of God or of heaven passed over 
from Abraham to Isaac. The more definite designation of 
this blessing follows in xxvi. 3, 12." p. 362, 363. "Isaac," 
says Drechsler, "is now in Abraham's place. From this 
time he is clothed with high authority — his cause is God's — 
and he himself the friend of God. And this very point, 
namely, that his influence extends to that higher sphere, that 
the connexion of the creator of the world to Abraham has 
passed over to him, lies in the word Elohim. And the ac- 
tion implied in the word " blessed," belongs principally to 

* See 2 Chron. xx. 7; Isa. xli. 8; and James ii. 2, 3. 



h 



INTRODUCTION. 59 

Elohim ; in other words, Jehovah blesses especially with 
blessings of his omnipotence, his creative power." p. 197. 
It is unnecessary to remark, that the representations of both 
these writers are far-fetched, in consequence of an unneces- 
sary application of a correct theory. 

The same remark applies in part to Hengstenberg's ex- 
planation of the usage in chap, xxvii. and xxviii. The dim- 
sighted Isaac speaks of the perfumed clothes of the supposed 
Esau thus : " See, the smell of my son is as the smell of a 
field which the Lord hath blessed." xxvii. 27. " Had the 
comparison been taken from an ordinary richly blooming 
field, Elohim would have been employed. The use of Je- 
hovah shows that the reference is to a field such as those of 
Paradise, wherein the traces of the Deity clearly shine forth, 
— an ideal field, holding the same relation to ordinary ones, as 
Israel did to the heathen, a sort of magic garden," &c. 
Such a land of enchantment he discovers Canaan to have 
been in some degree, when it became the residence of the 
chosen people. The odoriferous vestments of Jacob are 
viewed by his father as the type of Jehovah's garden, to be 
verified for Israel, as is pointed out in the words, "God give 
thee of the dew of heaven and the fatness of the earth and 
plenty of corn and wine." v. 28. p. 365, 368. The learned 
writer is carried away by his imagination. Doubtless the 
blessings referred to are, in a good degree, " theocratical," as 
he says, "and appertain, not to the general, but especial 
providence of God ;" and therefore the phraseology, " field 
which Jehovah hath blessed," is entirely apposite. But that 
the blessings referred to in xxv. 11, where the language is, 
" and God blessed Isaac," do not comprehend the same sort 
of benefactions, is incapable of proof. It would seem plain, 
that the choice of either term was in both places a matter 
of indifference. 

In xxviii. 16, also, when Jacob awakes from his vision and 



60 INTRODUCTION. 

says, *' surely Jehovah is in this place," we are told, that 
"Elohim could not have been employed," because, in that 
case, it would have implied Jacob's ignorance of the doc- 
trine of the divine omnipresence, p. 368.* But the correct- 
ness of this inference depends on Jacob's meaning. Un- 
doubtedly he might say, " God is in this place and I knew it 
not," if he meant that the Deity was peculiarly present to 
bless him. Jehovah indeed would be altogether appropri- 
ate, but Elohim might well be used, and in either case the 
sense would be precisely the same. The right explica- 
tion of the usage in both the chapters would seem to be in 
general simply this, that the Jehovah of xxvii. is identical 
with the Elohim of xxviii. — I have only to remark further, 
that Drechsler is undoubtedly right, when he represents the 
first four verses of chap, xxviii. as having a retrospective 
reference to chap. xvii. See p. 198. Compare especially 
the third verse of the former with the first of the latter. 

xxix. 31 — xxx. 24. In this section, the terms by which 
the Deity is designated are interchangeably used in connex- 
ion with the birth of Jacob's sons. The principles already 
laid down sufficiently explain the usage. And the frequent 
use of Elohim in chap. xxx. calls the reader's attention to the 
births in reference to which it occurs, as peculiar favours of 

* According to Ewald, " Jacob is reminded that his own family God 
is near him even in remote lands." Of course, any other term than Je- 
hovah would fail of the object. " That some deily ruled over the coun- 
try, Jacob had no need to be informed; but that his powerful family- 
God bore sway here also, he recognizes with the greatest joy." p. 59. 
According to this view, Jacob's knowledge of the true God was like that 
of Balak, who supposed that, although the divine influence might in- 
deed prevent Balaam from cursing the Israelites from one spot, another 
might be selected in which it should not be exeited; or, of those Syrians 
who thought, that "the Lord might be God of the hills, but not of the 
valleys." See Num. xxiii. 13, 27; 1 Kings, xx. 23, 28. How differ- 
ent this is from the real fact, it were idle to show to any believer in 
the inspiration of the Scriptures. 



INTRODUCTION. 61 

a beneficent Providence. It is unnecessary to search farther 
for any recondite motive for the choice of the term. But 
the writer to whom I am so much indebted, and from whose 
particular views I am compelled so often to dissent, is not 
satisfied with such a general solution. He finds a reason in 
what he supposes to be the internal condition of the two 
sisters at the various times of their becoming mothers. 
" Leah had suffered unrighteous treatment, and been sub- 
jected to mortification ; Jacob ? s averseness to her was chiefly 
attributable to her hard-hearted and invidious sister, who 
made this averseness an occasion of ridicule and contempt. 
Under these circumstances Leah and the author both re- 
cognized, in her own fruitfulness and Rachel's barrenness, 
not merely the general operation of Providence, but the 
especial influence of the righteous, retributive God. At the 
birth of " her maid's" children, no reference to the Deity 
occurs. In that of the 5th and 6th sons, an influence of 
Elohim is recognized ; that particular significance intended 
by the birth of the first four, here finds no place ; the 
object designed had been effected, and things resume their 
ordinary course ; Leah's consciousness of the divine in- 
fluence is less active : her eye is principally directed to 
natural causes, and she acknowledges only an indefinite 
divine co-operation."* 

" The later feeling of Leah influenced Rachel from the 
beginning. She had no impulse raising her to Jehovah, 
whom she could not but regard in the light of a judge and 
avenger. She would the more hesitate to express his name 
at the birth of " her maid's" sons, in proportion as she was 
conscious how much she had contributed to the event. 
After she has recognized the favour of God in the birth of 

* He then refers to what he had before said on the birth of Abel. See 
above, p. 19, 20. 



62 INTRODUCTION. 

her own first son, does she become more confident. She 
ventures to apply to Jehovah for a second son, forgetting 
that he ought to be the object of her fear, inasmuch as she 
persists in unrighteous conduct towards her sister. The 
son she prays for from Jehovah is indeed given by Jehovah, 
but as the son of her sorrow." p. 374, 375. 

It is impossible to read this representation of the simple 
narrative without feeling, that, while it contains some truth, 
it is overstrained and unjust to Rachel. Her sentiments 
towards her less loved, but, as a mother, more favoured 
sister, are doubtless not to be vindicated ; but this writer's 
exceedingly unfavourable exhibition of them is unwarranted, 
and the inferences he deduces altogether extravagant. 
Rachel's language on occasion of the birth of Dan, is a 
pious recognition of the divine protection, and on becom- 
ing herself the mother of Joseph, her piety and gratitude 
and faith are alike conspicuous. Undeviating adherence to 
a theory seems in this instance not only to have perverted 
Dr. Hengstenberg's judgment, but to have dimmed his per- 
ception of right. His mode of accounting for the use of 
Elohim on the birth of Leah's fifth and sixth sons, when Je- 
hovah had been employed by her before, is quite unneces- 
sary, and assumes a change of views and feelings in the 
mother, wholly improbable. 

In some other portions of Genesis, the author's assump- 
tions appear to be equally arbitrary. Knowledge of Jeho- 
vah, and what the word implies in denoting God's relation 
to men, is attributed or denied, in accordance with the 
theory, when the outward circumstances and internal 
characteristics of the individuals, (so far as the brevity of 
the narrative allows us to form a judgment respecting them,) 
afford little or no ground for the very important conclusions 
deduced. I cannot but think that this observation applies 
not only to what has already been quoted concerning Leah 



INTRODUCTION. 63 

and Rachel, but also to some of his remarks in reference to 
the father of these women. It is especially applicable to 
his declaration respecting Esau, made in order to illustrate 
Jacob's use of Elohim in xxxiii. 11, while in xxxii. 9 — 12, he 
had appealed to Jehovah as the author of all his mercies. 
" Jehovah lay without the circle of Esau's religious views, 
whose piety was superficial, and who had only an occasional 
hour of devotion." p. 379. Admitting this delineation of 
Esau's religious character to be in general correct, it does 
not prove that the name Jehovah was not familiarly used 
by him, as it undoubtedly was in his father's family, much 
less that Jacob was led, by such a consideration, delibe- 
rately to choose the term Elohim in preference to the 
other. 

Chaps, xxxix. — 1. In the former part of this section, the 
term Jehovah predominates, and is always used when the 
author is himself the speaker. In the other parts, Elohim 
maintains the supremacy, and is changed occasionally for 
God Almighty, which is of similar import. Indeed, the 
word Jehovah is only employed once in the last ten chapters 
of Genesis, namely, in Jacob's dying ejaculation, xlix. 18, 
while in the same portion Elohim occurs eighteen times. 
On the other hand, in chap, xxxix., the former term appears 
eight times, and the latter only once. The repeated use of 
Jehovah in this chapter might be expected, as Joseph's con- 
dition was subject to the influence of that special provi- 
dence which superintended the chosen race, protected them 
in Egypt, and thus prepared them for their future destination. 
The use of Elohim in the ninth verse, may be accounted 
for as Hengstenberg (p. 384,) and Drechsler, (p. 204,) sug- 
gest, on the ground that Joseph is addressing a heathen, to 
whom this general designation would be more appropriate, 
if not more intelligible, than the other more particular 
name. In repelling the advances of Potiphar's wife, he 



64 INTRODUCTION. 

says, " How can I do this great wickedness, and sin against 
God?" The subsequent use of Elohim is easily explained 
on the principles already stated ; and it is unnecessary to 
trouble the reader with a repetition of them. But when 
Hengstenberg attempts to account for its introduction in 
xli. 51, 52, where Joseph ascribes his happy condition to 
" God, because he did not regard the birth of his sons as 
connected with the development of the divine kingdom," 
and because "it is the general idea of providence which 
here rules, the indefinite feeling of dependence which governs 
him," (p. 385,) he says what may possibly be true, but 
what he neither does nor can establish, and is exceedingly 
improbable. And why should he assume this of Joseph, 
and just the very contrary of Leah ? It may indeed be 
admitted, that, in xlv. 5 — 9, the use of Elohim marks the 
divine agency in contradistinction to the merely human ; 
but where does he find proof of his declaration, (introduced 
as a probable exposition of the use of Elohim in v. 9,) that 
"Jacob had been wholly governed by human considerations, 
and had entirely lost from his view the leadings of God, by 
whom and not by man he was to be drawn to Egypt" ? 
p. 380. Neither the history in general, nor the uniform 
course of conduct of the patriarch, in any degree favours 
such a supposition. It is a gratuitous aspersion of his re- 
ligious character, like that before attempted to be thrown 
on the wife of his earlier and deeper affections. 

Indeed, this learned writer is not himself satisfied with 
the application of his theory, in every case in which these 
two divine names occur in the latter portion of Genesis. 
He says, that ' although the use of Elohim in xlviii. 9, " these 
are my sons whom God hath given me," may be vindicated, 
if we keep the connexion out of view ; yet, it is evident, 
that the more suitable term would be Jehovah, whose bless- 
ing immediately follows. So also in v. 11, " Lo ! God hath 






INTRODUCTION. 65 

showed me thy seed," Elohim may indeed be justified, as 
expressive of divine direction in opposition to human pur- 
pose ; yet, the solemnity of the occasion would rather lead 
us to expect the grateful heart to raise itself to Jehovah. 
Along with places in which Elohim must necessarily stand, 
are found several in which it does answer sufficiently well, 
but Jehovah equally so, and some in which Jehovah is 
plainly the more suitable. These phenomena are surprising, 
and would seem to require the admission of some grounds 
for the usage particularly appropriate to themselves.' p. 
386—388. 

The author very judiciously rejects the solution advanced 
by Sack, that Joseph uses the word Elohim in accordance 
with that heathen influence by which he was surrounded ; 
and that Jacob, in his intercourse with him, acquiesces in 
the same usage. His own is vastly more respectful to the 
venerable patriarchs, but whether supported on surer grounds, 
is, to say the least, doubtful. He had before suggested, that, 
in the earlier patriarchal history, the frequent use of Elohim, 
and the designed omission of Jehovah, intimated the ap- 
proach of a new period in the development of the divine 
character and being. He applies the same principle in the 
cases in contemplation, which correspond with the usage in 
the earlier portion of Exodus, in which Elohim, not Jeho- 
vah, is the prevailing term. " The Jehovah-sun," says he, 
u had hidden himself behind a cloud in reference to the cho- 
sen race ; they hoped that he would again burst forth in 
clearer splendor than ever, but were conscious that for the 
present he was not to be seen. The descent into Egypt 
must necessarily direct their eager expectation to the future. 
But in proportion as their eye was turned to the glorious 
revelations of God still in prospect, he was to them for the 
present Elohim." p. 390, 391. 

If, now, the invariable usage in the previous part of the 
9 



66 INTRODUCTION. 

book of Genesis were manifestly such as to show, that the 
author had strictly kept in view the etymological and really 
different meaning of the two divine names, the solution sug- 
gested by Hengstenberg, or some other accommodated to 
the difficulty, might be accepted ; but, as so many cases oc- 
cur, where the principle is either altogether or partially in- 
applicable, the instances referred to in the latter part of the 
book are to be classed in the same category with those. 
Inasmuch as they contain nothing peculiar, they are fairly 
explicable on the grounds already stated. 

Ewald would account for the use of Elohim in xlix. 29 — 
1. 26, in xl. 8, and many other places, on the ground that the 
subject has no reference to the national god of the Hebrews, 
but merely to God, considered as superintending and direct- 
ing the condition of a family, p. 45 ss. But this is evidently 
unsatisfactory, for the character and condition of a nation 
did certainly belong to the Hebrews when in Egypt, more 
properly than in the time of Abraham or Isaac, and even in 
the earlier period of Jacob's life ; and yet, in these latter 
circumstances, the national name, as he would call it, is fre- 
quently applied. Here, I presume, he would introduce his 
hypothesis of a second document. 

There is doubtless a large proportion of places in Genesis, 
where the author has been led to the choice of these terms 
respectively, because of some peculiar adaptation of the one 
or the other to the subject in connexion with which it occurs. 
There are other portions in which he seems to have employed 
both, in order to prevent the possibility of his reader's sup- 
posing a different being to be intended. And probably there 
are still others in which the usage differs for the sake of va- 
riety, and because no particular motive existed to determine 
his mind to the choice of one rather than the other. If some 
cases do exist, in which it is difficult and perhaps impossible 
to settle the ground of the choice of these appellations of the 



INTRODUCTION. 67 

supreme being, the variety of the usage is no proof of dif- 
ferent original documents. One writer may have varied the 
terms for the best of reasons, although in some instances not 
now discoverable. 

I conclude this introduction with the following extracts 
from Jahn, p. 208 ss., with such slight modification of his lan- 
guage as appears to be necessary in order to make his view 
in all respects correct. 

" The records contained in the book of Genesis are not 
the fictions or allegories by which in very ancient times 
wise men chose to veil their philosophical opinions, neither 
are they mythi, or histories intermingled with mythi, such 
as other nations relate concerning their earliest ages; but 
they are true histories. This will be evident from the fol- 
lowing considerations. 

" These relations were committed to writing nearly a 
thousand years before the mythi of the most ancient nations. 
But in those remote times, the ordinary life of man extended 
to so great a length, that there could be no necessity for oral 
tradition to pass through the mouths of many generations. 
Methuselah was contemporary with Adam during the first 
two hundred and forty-three years of his life, and with Noah 
during the last six hundred, and Noah with Abraham fifty- 
eight years. Thus three generations would have transmitted 
the account of the creation of the world to Abraham. The 
histories of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were committed to 
writing not long after their times, and from Jacob to Moses 
it would seem that only four generations intervened.* Some, 

* It is a common opinion, that in Ex. vi. 14 — 19, some generations 
are omitted, because four hundred and thirty years make thirteen gene- 
rations instead of four. But, as in Gen. xv. 13, 16, four generations are 
in express terms made equivalent to four hundred years, and as the two 
hundred and fifteen years which Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob spent in 
Canaan occupied only two generations, it is evident that a generation at 



68 INTRODUCTION. 

indeed, have considered the longevity which is ascribed to 
the men of the first ages of the world as a mythus, simply 
because they imagined it to be impossible that the human 
body should subsist so many years. But no reasonable per- 
son will maintain that everything was the same in those 
early ages, especially before the deluge, as it is now. Why, 
then, must the age of man have necessarily been the same 
at that time as at present ? All other nations extend the 

that time comprehended a hundred years, and not merely thirty-four, as 
was the case at a much later period. 

Thus Dr. Jahn. And the remark may be correct. But it ought to 
be considered that a principle which would be applicable to the time of 
Abraham, would hardly suit that of Moses, when the period of human 
life had been greatly abridged. The truth is, there is difficulty con- 
nected with the question how long the Israelites remained in Egypt. 
In favour of the shorter period of two hundred and fifteen years, it may 
be said, that this agrees best with St. Paul's remark in Gal. hi. 17, that 
"the law was four hundred and thirty years after the promise;" that 
this space accords with the reading of the Samaritan Pentateuch and 
Septuagint version in Ex. xii. 40, which add the clause "and in the 
land of Canaan," which is not in the Hebrew. Compare the following 
texts in Genesis, which show that the space of time between Abraham's 
removal from Haran and Jacob's descent to Egypt was two hundred and 
fifteen years : xii. 4 ; xxi. 5 ; xxv. 26 ; xlvii. 9. This view corresponds 
best with the genealogy in Ex. vi. and Num. xxvii. 1. It would seem 
also from Num. xxvi. 59, that the mother of Moses was the daughter 
of Levi. 

On the other hand, in favour of a residence of four hundred or four 
hundred and thirty years, the express declarations in Gen. xv. 13, can- 
not be set aside. Comp. also Acts vii. 6. The Hebrew of Ex. xii. 60, 
is also exceedingly strong, and the addition of the Samaritan and Sep- 
tuagint have the appearance of a gloss designed to remove a supposed 
difficulty. St. Paul may be allowed, in a matter which had no bearing 
on his argument, to follow the Septuagint, as best known to the mass of 

his readers. 

The genealogy of Joshua in 1 Chron. vii. 20 — 27, which descends 
from Ephraim through ten generations at least, corresponds best with 
the longer period. The difficulty from Num. xxvi. 59, is examined by 
Perizonius in his iEgyptiaca; Origines, cap. xx. p. 356 ss. ; but he has 
not succeeded in satisfactorily removing it. 



INTRODUCTION. 69 

lives of the first inhabitants of earth to some thousands of 
years ; the records in Genesis, therefore, which give a far 
more moderate duration of existence, are not to be suspect- 
ed of falsehood in this particular. The ancient worthies 
esteemed the patriarchal accounts of very great importance, 
as the groundwork and witness of their religion ; as such 
they taught them to their children, and in old age frequently 
repeated the oft-told story, so that there could be little dan- 
ger of the narrative being misunderstood or designedly cor- 
rupted. Such parts as had been clothed in verse, vestiges 
of which occur in Gen. iv. 23, 24, would be the more easily 
retained in memory, and could not be altered without inju- 
ring the parallelism or disturbing the harmony ; and this 
would lead to the observation and correction of the error. 

"The events related are fewer, and the narratives less full, 
and perhaps more obscure in proportion to the antiquity of 
the accounts and the length of time during which they were 
preserved by tradition ; while, on the contrary, those which 
are the most modern are also the most complete. From 
this it is evident that the compiler or author of Genesis must 
have rejected all uncertain and suspicious accounts, very 
many of which had doubtless come down from a period of 
considerable antiquity, and must have received those only 
the correctness of which was unquestionable. 

" Further, the subjects of the narrative are of the simplest 
kind, and altogether dissimilar to those which fill the earli- 
est histories of other nations. If in any respects a slight 
similitude is discoverable, it is still evident that the latter are 
feigned or amplified and distorted by fictions, while the for- 
mer exhibit merely the simple truth. This was acknow- 
ledged, without any hesitation, by the heathen, whether 
learned or unlearned, who in the first ages of Christianity 
turned from the contemplation of their own fables to that of 
the Hebrew Scriptures. Besides, those doubtful or partly 



70 INTRODUCTION. 

fictitious narrations, or, if the definition be preferred, philo- 
sophical opinions clothed in allegorical language, which are 
known by the name of mythi, are single fragments, which 
have no real connexion either among themselves or with 
genuine history. But the accounts in the book of Genesis 
are indissolubly connected with each other and with history 
in general. The mythi abound with fictions relating princi- 
pally to gods and goddesses and demigods, to their wars, 
and even to their obscene and sexual intercourse. They 
relate to demons, heroes, nymphs, and metamorphoses, also 
to the inventors of useful arts and founders of noble families, 
whose origin they fabulously ascribe to an intermixture of 
the divine with the human. In the first book of the Penta- 
teuch, nothing of the kind is to be found. The accounts 
which it contains relate only to one God, the creator and 
governor of the universe, and the preserver and guardian of 
morals and religion, to the establishment, protection, and 
promotion of which they are devoted ; and they hold forth 
the prospect of an auspicious and blessed period, when true 
religion and virtue shall be propagated among all nations. 
That this prediction has been already fulfilled in a great 
degree, is undeniable ; and past accomplishment encourages 
the believer to anticipate its completion. 

"Should it be granted that alterations may have taken 
place in these accounts, yet even this would not render the 
character of the principal parts on which the history rests 
suspicious. Those portions which might be supposed to be 
most liable to suspicion of corruption or fiction, are such 
as may be thought to border on the marvellous, such as the 
accounts of divine revelations. But these very accounts of 
revelations contain predictions of the perpetual duration of 
the religion which they teach among the posterity of its 
first possessors, and of its future propagation among all 
nations, which it would have been impossible for the authors 



INTRODUCTION. 7 1 

of these accounts, whoever they were, to invent. See Gen. 
xii. 1 — 3, xviii. 18, xxii. 18, xxvi. 4, xxviii. L4, xviii. 19, and 
xvii. 4 — 14. The idea of God, which pervades all these 
records, is such as would never have originated with unas- 
sisted man. 

" It may be remarked farther, that if these narratives, like 
the fabulous accounts of other nations, had been altered so 
as to suit the fancy of the narrator, they would have dif- 
fered in many respects from their present form. As good 
morals are everywhere inculcated in them, the immoralities 
and facts of doubtful character which now occur and are 
certainly but little honourable to the principal personages of 
the history, would have been omitted. The various narra- 
tives which appear in the book of Genesis would not have 
corresponded so accurately with the nature of things ; the 
speeches which it contains (see particularly xliii. 1 — 14, 
and xliv. 18 — 44,) would hardly have been so exactly suited 
to the characters and situations of their respective authors ; 
the general character of the personages would not have 
been preserved with such uniform and permanent consis- 
tency, but would have approached occasionally to carica- 
ture ; the four hundred years of Gen. xv. 30, would have 
been changed into four hundred and thirty, to correspond 
with Ex. xii. 40; the apparent contradictions would have 
been reconciled ; in one word, the whole narration would 
not have been so perfectly consentaneous to the general 
course of things observable in other histories.* 

* " Illustrative of the manner in which the rationalists exhibit the 
statements made in the Bible, and endeavour to place them on the same 
footing wiih the early and fabulous accounts of other nations," I quote 
from the notice of Drechsler, already referred to, in the New York Re- 
view, p. 134, 135. 

" ' It is well known,' says Von Bohlen, 'that all the nations of anti- 
quity possessed accounts of the early history of mankind, of the increase 



72 INTRODUCTION. 

" The arguments which have been urged against the his- 
torical credit of the documents employed by the author of 
the book of Genesis do not prove that the narrations origin- 
ally given in these documents have been altered, but only 
that they may have been ; that is, in effect, they prove 
nothing, for the argument from possibilities to facts is void 
of all force. He attempts to show that the narrations con- 
tained in these documents cannot be true, are entirely futile. 
Such is the assertion, that our first parents could not have 
immediately related the events described in Gen. ii. 4 — iii. 24, 

and extension of the human race, and even of the creation of the 
universe. In immediate connexion with them is the knowledge of 
God, his being and attributes, his connexion with the world, and par- 
ticularly with men. These accounts remind us of a period, during 
which God or divine beings came down to earth, walked among men in 
human form, trying their virtue, promising and threatening, rewarding 
and punishing. To say all in one word, most of the eastern nations 
possessed writings similar in their contents to those of the Old Testa- 
ment ; and this not only in general, but often in particular, and even in 
a remarkable degree.' 

"From this representation, which no literary man thinks of question- 
ing, what is to be gained ? From promises like these, what results ? 
As the accounts referred to are undoubtedly fabulous, the rationalist 
writer infers or assumes that those in the Old Testament are of the 
same character. A more direct and palpable begging of the question 
cannot be imagined. It is, as Drechsler says, a logical blunder. The 
possible suppositions of which the case admits are three. Either, 
several of these different accounts contain portions of historical truth ; or, 
as Von Bohlen thinks, all are untrue ; or one alone is really and his- 
torically the true statement. The sober and rational inquirer will not 
content himself with assuming that condition, which his prepossessions 
may have constituted the favourite one in his mind, but will carefully 
examine the evidence of all, and admit the one in favour of which the 
evidence preponderates." 

To maintain, as the neological party in Germany have done, that a 
narrative must be fabulous or fictitious, or of comparatively late date, 
because its contents are of a prophetic or miraculous character, pre- 
sumes the impossibility of prophecy or miracle, and is a course of 
procedure utterly unworthy of the name of argument. 



INTRODUCTION. 73 

in consequence of the imperfection of their language ; and 
that when their stock of words had increased, they could 
not have remembered the events of their earliest existence, 
because without words nothing could be retained beyond 
an obscure recollection of things. But neither of these as- 
sertions is true. For, as to the former, our first parents 
were adult in the first moment of their existence, possessing 
the use of all the faculties of their minds, and of all the 
members of their bodies. They had, moreover, both the 
power of speech and incitement to its use, so that as soon 
as the ideas which must have entered their minds imme- 
diately upon their existence were conceived, they expressed 
them in language. With respect to the other assertion, the 
ideas produced during the first moments of their existence, 
when in possession of all their intellectual powers, whether 
they were produced by the impressions of the senses or by 
the instructions of the Deity, would be the most tenaciously 
retained by the mind, for the very reason that they were 
the first ; they would be treasured in its inmost recesses, 
so as to be readily recollected during the remainder of life, 
and easily narrated in language sufficiently copious at any 
subsequent period. 

" There can be no doubt that the doctrine of a creating 
Deity, and consequently that of the creation and origin of 
all things, are maintained throughout the whole of the book 
of Genesis ; for the object of all the documents employed 
in its compilation, is to teach, that this doctrine was revealed 
to our first parents, that it was preserved by especial divine 
providence until the time of Abraham, and that it was to be 
preserved and at last propagated among all nations. The 
account therefore of the creation, with which the book 
commences, inasmuch as it coincides with this general ob- 
ject, is not a fiction, nor a poetical description of the creation, 
nor a philosophical speculation of some ancient sage, but, as 
10 



74 INTRODUCTION. 

the historical tenor of the whole narration shows, a real 
history. And, inasmuch as no witness existed to recount 
the particulars of the creation of the earth, it is evident that 
the matter of this history must have been derived from divine 
revelation, given for the purpose of instructing the early in- 
habitants of earth, in the manner best suited to their capa- 
cities, that there is no divine being or object of worship 
except the creator, and that the general objects of creation 
were destined for the use of man, so that they are not divi- 
nities, but, on the contrary, he is their Lord." 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 



The Book of Genesis is divided by the Jews into twelve 
larger sections, called Pharshioth, tTPIp'Ilp ; and in some 
copies into forty-three smaller ones, denominated Sedarim, 
d'H'lO* But, independently of this division, and that of fifty 
chapters, adopted in our English translation, both of which 
are arbitrary, the attentive reader will perceive another in 
the construction of the book itself. It is composed of eleven 
parts, 1 each of which has an appropriate inscription or intro- 
ductory notice of the subject concerning which it treats. 
They are as follows : Part I. chap. i. 1 — ii. 3, inclusive ; 
II. ii. 4— iv. 26 ; III. v. 1— vi. 8 ; IV. vi. 9— ix. 29 ; V. x. 
l_xi. 9: VI. xi. 10—26; VII. xi. 27— xxv. 11 ; VIII. xxv. 
12 — 18; IX. xxv. 19 — xxxv. 29; X. xxxvi. ; XI. xxxvii. 
1—1. 26. 

Part I. Chap. i. 1 — n. 3. 

The first part contains an account of the creation, either 
of the visible universe, or of the solar system, or of the earth. 
If the sacred writer had the visible universe in view, as is 
probable from the general nature of some of the language 
employed, 2 it is undeniable that in the details he confines 
himself to the globe which we inhabit. Whether the first 
verse is an introduction, intended to state, in the way of a 



76 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

general proposition, the same course of action which the 
subsequent verses specify, — or whether it relates the origi- 
nal creation of the mass itself, out of which the world was 
formed in the manner and order afterwards recounted, it 
is perhaps impossible to say. 3 

The condition of the earth before it was reduced to order 
by its almighty maker, is described as one of confusion. 
Covered with water, it appeared as a shapeless mass, without 
such arrangements and provisions as were necessary to fit it 
for the reception of its future inhabitants. 4 Preparatory to 
this result, the Spirit of God is represented as acting on the 
chaos, impregnating 5 the dead substance with the princi- 
ples of life and motion. At the will of God, 6 light begins to 
pervade the sluggish mass ; and by the rotatory motion of 
the earth, the vicissitude of night and day is produced. 
v. 2—5. 

During a subsequent revolution the vital principle still 
continues to operate. From the watery mass vapors arise 
and the firmament presents itself, visibly separating the 
dense fluid below from the lighter aqueous body sustained 
by the clouds. To this apparently solid substance, God 
gives the name of heaven, thereby indicating its eleva- 
tion. 6— 8. 7 

On the third day, the waters which still continued to 
cover the surface of the earth, are made to flow together 
into their vast reservoirs, and thus the dry ground and the 
seas are formed. — Preparation having been thus made by 
the formation of light, of atmospheric air, and of earth suita- 
bly separated from the water, life is called into existence. 
The earth teems with its various productions, and the once 
waste and desert surface exhibits the varied beauties of 
arranged nature in all its vegetable kingdom. 9 — 13. 

The fourth day presents to the supposed observer of pro- 
gressive creation the effect of the same vital action which 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 77 

had been going on from the commencement. The light 
which on the first day had begun to penetrate the dark 
chaotic mass, and which the separation of the fluids after- 
wards increased, bursts forth in its pure unveiled brilliancy. 
In the now cleared up vault of heaven the glorious sun ap- 
pears, the great lord of day ; also the moon, evidently the 
inferior luminary, w T hich is poetically represented as the 
queen of night, attended by her innumerable train, the stars. 
According to the principle which evidently governs the 
writer in the whole narrative of the creation, the heavenly 
bodies are said to be made for the benefit of the future in- 
habitants of this globe, as signs to designate various periods 
of time, and also as luminaries to enlighten the earth. And 
this representation is repeated. 14 — 19. 8 

Animal life now appears. Fishes and birds of different 
kinds are created on the fifth day, and on the sixth the 
various creatures which the earth sustains on its surface. 
20—25. 

In the account of man's formation, the language used 
indicates somewhat more of solemnity, of dignified deli- 
beration, than that before employed. Heretofore we read 
of every thing called into being : " and God said, let" this 
or that take place, and the effect follows the expression 
of his will. But now the variation is striking : " and God 
said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness." 9 
The creation follows, and man appears, the noblest of earth's 
inhabitants, the lord of this lower world, endowed with im- 
mortality, and in moral character holy, like his maker. 
26 — 28. 10 This is followed by the grant of vegetables and 
fruits to be used as food by all the animal creation. 29, 30. 11 
The almighty creator surveys the workmanship of his hands, 
and pronounces every thing to be good. The sixth day 
attests that all is finished. 31. 

The section concludes by instructing us, that, inasmuch as 



78 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

God had completed his work, he sanctified the seventh day, 
in memory of the glorious result, ii. 1 — 3. 12 

Part II. Chap. ii. 4 — iv. 26. 

We are here presented with an account of the state of the 
world immediately after its creation, together with some 
highly interesting and important facts relating to the early 
history of man. 

At the time of the creation, vegetable productions did not 
spring from the ground, through the influence of rain and 
human industry, but, as the text implies, by a direct, divine 
power. Since that period, nature has taken its ordinary 
course. Mists have risen from the ground, and have come 
down in refreshing showers, and man, formed of the earth 
and endowed with a divinely communicated principle of life, 
has cultivated the soil. 4 — 7. 13 The narration now pro- 
ceeds to tell us of the settlement of man in the garden of 
Eden, particularly mentioning its two most important pro- 
ductions, the tree of life, and the tree of knowledge. The 
former seems to have derived its name from its properties in 
continuing life, plainly alluded to in iii. 22 ; and the latter, 
from the practical knowledge of evil in contradistinction to 
good, which unhappily flowed from its use, which is inter- 
dicted under the penalty of death. 14 A river is said to have 
supplied the garden with water, and hence to have formed 
four principal streams, which are named and otherwise ge- 
ographically designated. 15 The accommodation of the man 
with a companion adapted to his nature and wants, is closely 
connected with his examining and naming the various ani- 
mals, none of whom was sufficiently dignified to become the 
spouse of creation's lord. From the substance of the man 
himself the woman is created by almighty power, and he 
recognizes her as a fit companion, expressing the depth of his 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 79 

affection by identifying her with his own person. 18 Imme- 
diately the historian declares the inviolable character of the 
marriage union, to which every other relationship, even 
that of parent and child, must yield precedence. 17 He sub- 
joins an intimation of the primaeval purity of the first 
pair. 8 — 25. 

In the third chapter we have an account of the fall of our 
first parents from the state of innocence in which they were 
created. 18 The devil, either assuming a serpent as his in- 
strument, or allegorically represented under the figure of a 
serpent, 19 (an animal considered by the ancients as particu- 
larly prudent and cunning, and therefore selected as best 
fitted for the purpose,) tempts the woman to disregard the 
prohibition of the use of the tree of the knowledge of good 
and evil, by assuring her that the threatened consequences 
should not take place, but, on the contrary, that the use of 
the fruit, so excellent in itself and so beautiful in appear- 
ance, would impart a divine wisdom, enabling the partaker 
to discriminate between good and evil. The woman yield- 
ed to the temptation ; and, at her offer, the man also ate of 
the fruit and transgressed the divine law. 1 — 6. The la- 
mentable effects immediately follow. Their knowledge is 
indeed increased, 20 but it is a practical knowledge of sin and 
misery. They are conscious of the loss of purity, and en- 
deavor to remove their sense of shame, by resorting to a 
rude covering of intertwined boughs of the fig-tree. At the 
approach of their almighty father towards the evening, a 
sense of guilt leads them to the silly attempt to conceal 
themselves from the Omniscient. But it is impossible to 
escape his investigation. He examines the facts of the 
case, and passes sentence on all the parties. In the first 
place, the tempter himself is condemned to a state of utter 
degradation and servility ; perpetual enmity between his 
race and that of the woman is to be established ; although 



80 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

he shall be permitted to injure the latter in an inferior de- 
gree, yet in the end it shall completely destroy his energy 
and power. 21 Next, the sentence of the woman is an- 
nounced; subjection to the man, and pains and distresses 
peculiar to the female sex. Lastly, the punishment of the 
man is declared. The ground must be cultivated with hard 
and incessant toil ; its natural productions shall be thorns ; 
the path of life shall be chequered with sorrows, till at last 
death closes the scene, and the body, forsaken by the soul, 
the animating breath of the Almighty, degenerates into its 
original dust. 7 — 19. 22 The history then mentions the name 
given by Adam to his wife and the reason of it; 23 and states, 
that, by divine direction, they were both clothed with the 
skins of animals. 24 It closes by relating their expulsion from 
Paradise, and the means adopted to prevent their access to 
the tree of life. 25 

The history of the fall is succeeded by a narrative, which 
strikingly depicts its natural consequences, by exhibiting the 
deformity of sin. Cain and Abel, two of the children of our 
first parents, 26 are represented as bringing their offerings to 
God, each selecting for the token of his homage a portion of 
the fruits of his industry in his respective avocation. That 
of the former was rejected because of his wickedness, while 
the faith of the latter secured its acceptance. 27 The divine 
impartiality, (Acts x. 34, 35,) and the warning and exhortation 
accompanying it, 28 produced no good effect on the mind of 
Cain. On the contrary, he yielded to the impulse of uncon- 
trolled passion, and murdered his brother, iv. 1 — 8. Di- 
vine justice inquires into the crime, which the fratricide at- 
tempts to conceal by a falsehood, expressed with that inso- 
lence which sometimes characterizes persons who are under 
the influence of the " wicked one." But in vain. The atro- 
city of the deed demands punishment. The very earth feels 
the unnaturalness of the act, and drinks in the murdered 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 81 

brother's blood, endeavoring to hide the shame of her un- 
worthy son. At the same time, her detestation of the act is 
shown, by refusing to bless the murderer. To such a 
wretch earth will not yield its strength, and, without a habi- 
tation or subsistence, he becomes " a vagabond." 9 — 12. 
The unhappy culprit feels the wretchedness of his condition. 
Whether he laments the severity of his punishment or the 
" exceeding sinfulness" of his crime, may be uncertain ; but 
it can hardly be doubted, that some penitential character 
must have been perceived by the searcher of hearts before 
he threatened seven-fold vengeance on the man who should 
take the life of Cain. So great is the wretched fratricide's 
distress, that his faith in the divine promise of protection 
is confirmed by a sign, which was probably miraculous. 
13 — 15. 29 Still, this does not prevent Cain's banishment. 
He settles in a country, which, perhaps, derived its name 
from the fact of his expulsion. 30 There he becomes the 
father of Enoch, the ancestor of Lamech ; the descendants 
of whose two wives are particularly distinguished. Those 
of the one are noted for the skill with which they pur- 
sued pastoral occupations, and refined society by musi- 
cal inventions and improvements ; while those of the other 
became " artificers in brass and iron," thus contributing to 
the progress of those arts which make human life comforta- 
ble and easy. 16 — 22. Some unknown circumstances ap- 
pear to have given uneasiness to Lamech's wives, whom he 
comforts with the assurance, that he was exposed to no 
danger, and that any attempt on his life would not fail to 
draw down the severest judgments. 23, 24. 31 After noticing 
the birth of Seth, whom maternal piety and affection regard 
as a substitute for the lost Abel, and the birth also of a son 
to Seth, this part of the book concludes with the statement, 
that public worship then began to be celebrated in honor of 
11 



82 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

Jehovah, in contradistinction probably to incipient idolatry* 
25, 26. 33 

Part III. Chap. v. 1 — vi. 9. 

This part begins with a genealogical list of Adam's 33 des- 
cendants to Noah through the line of Seth. vi. 32. 34 Among 
the most remarkable is Enoch, alike distinguished for his 
exalted piety, and its extraordinary reward, an early trans- 
lation to God without subjection to death. 22 — 24. 35 The 
curse of toilsome labor denounced against Adam, iii. 17, 
seems to have been particularly oppressive to Lamech ; 
and, either in the prospect of assistance to be obtained from 
his son's co-operation in cultivating the soil, or in the hope 
that his son's labors might lead to an increase of piety, and 
thus lessen or remove that part of the penal consequences 
of the first transgression, he gives him a name expressive of 
the rest and comfort which he hoped to attain. 29. 36 — If the 
patriarch did indulge this hope, subsequent events showed 
its utter fallacy. The degeneracy of mankind seems to 
have kept pace with their increase. Descendants of the 
pious, associates of the people of God, intermarried with 
those of an opposite character, allured by beauty and go- 
verned by inclination, vi. 1, 2. 37 As might be expected, the 
divine judgment is threatened, while at the same time space 
is allowed for repentance. 3. 38 Revolt from God, lawless 
aggression, and proud desire of human distinction, seem to 
characterize the wickedness of that period. 4, 5. 39 In 
language adapted to human feeling and comprehension, God 
is said to have repented that he had made man, and to be 
grieved at the heart. He determines to destroy the aban- 
doned ingrates, while he spares the righteous Noah. 6 — 8. 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 83 



Part IV. Chap. vi. 9— xi. 29. 

This portion is introduced by an inscription stating it to 
be the history of Noah. The principal point in the narra- 
tive is the account of the deluge. The general wickedness 
of men requires that the punishment should extend to the 
whole human race, and therefore God expresses his deter- 
mination to cut off all mankind, and to lay the earth waste. 
9 — 13. 40 Noah is commanded to construct an ark or navi- 
gable vessel of cypress wood, of capacious dimensions* 
with proper apertures for the admission of light and air. 
14 — 16. 41 While the devouring element is to destroy the 
mass of living creatures, Noah and his family are to be 
preserved in this vessel, together with the various classes of 
animals which would otherwise perish in the waters. Two 
of unclean and seven of clean beasts are the numbers speci- 
fied. 42 These are introduced into the ark, certainly not 
without an extraordinary influence of divine Providence, 
which indeed might be expected under such circumstances, 
and is in harmony with the character of the whole trans- 
action. The natural causes of the flood are stated to be the 
incessant torrents of rain that fell during forty days and 
nights, and the vast swell of the ocean, produced doubtless 
by the operation of volcanic and other agitating elements in 
the bowels of the earth. " The fountains of the great deep," 
and "the windows of heaven," (vii. 11,) express these causes 
in language beautifully simple, yet highly poetic. The 
waters covered the top of the highest ground to the depth 
of fifteen cubits, and for the space of one hundred and fifty 
days continued to increase and to desolate the earth. 
17— viL24. 

The melancholy condition of the patriarch may well be 
imagined ; but the divine mercy displays itself : H God re- 



84 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

membered Noah." What a beautiful expression of parental 
affection ! The rain ceases ; the ocean falls back into its deep- 
ened bed, and the ark rests on the mountains of Armenia. 43 
With unutterable joy Noah beholds the tops of the moun- 
tains just beginning to show themselves. He sends out a 
raven ; then a dove, which at first returns as she went, but 
afterwards brings back in her mouth the " olive leaf," token 
of peace, and proof that the waters had subsided. Sent 
out a third time, she returns no more. viii. 1 — 12. 

Now the ground is comparatively dry, and Noah's family 
leave the ark, accompanied by its numerous inmates. A 
solemn act of devotion marks the patriarch's gratitude, and 
is graciously accepted by his almighty preserver. He de- 
termines no more to bring such a destruction on the earth. 
He will not " be extreme to mark what is done amiss ;" for 
man's earliest imaginations are, like his nature, evil. 13 — 22. 
Then follows the divine blessing bestowed on the family of 
Noah, in language like that before addressed to Adam, (i. 28,) 
with the express grant, however, of animal food, the blood 
or life excepted. 44 Capital punishment is threatened to the 
murderer ; and, to increase man's horror at the taking of 
human life, the unconscious, irrational brute is to bear the 
penalty of his unintentional manslaughter. The dignity of 
man's nature, created originally in the image of God, is 
stated as a reason for the severe penalty. By defacing the 
divine likeness, the murderer attempts, as it were, to mar, if 
not to destroy the divinity itself, ix. 1 — 7. 45 The promise 
before made, not to destroy all living things by another 
flood, a promise equivalent to a solemn agreement made by 
the creator with his creatures, is renewed ; and the rain- 
bow, which probably at that time spanned the vault of 
heaven, is made the sign of its accomplishment. The pro- 
mise is repeated, in token of perpetuity. 8 — 17. 

The fact of Noah's three sons being the sole fathers of 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 85 

the second world is then distinctly stated. This is followed 
by the narrative of Noah's planting a vineyard, and, on too 
free indulgence in the wine, through ignorance probably of the 
strength of the liquor, becoming intoxicated, and indecently 
exposed. The unfilial behaviour of Ham, and the pious and 
modest deportment of his two brothers, becoming known to 
the patriarch on his awaking, he predicts the future fates 
of their respective descendants. On the posterity of Ham, 
through his son Canaan, he denounces the curse of de- 
graded servitude, which was remarkably verified in the 
future history of the Canaanitish nations. By blessing Je- 
hovah as the God of Shem, he implies a benediction of the 
highest kind on Shem himself, inasmuch as the " people 
whose God is the Lord" cannot but be " happy." Ps. cxliv. 
15. To the posterity of Japheth, he promises wide and ex- 
tensive territory ; and the progress and prodigious increase 
of numerous colonies, founded by Europeans in various parts 
of the world, have for ages attested the truth of the pre- 
diction, and are still continuing to add to its evidence. The 
occupancy of territory by the posterity of Japheth, which 
was originally peopled by that of his brother, may be in- 
tended by the phrase, " he shall dwell in the tents of 
Shem" ; but more probably it alludes to the future connex- 
ion of the descendants of each, as associated together prin- 
cipally in religious harmony, by the union of Japheth's 
progeny with the Hebrews in the kingdom of the Messiah. 46 
A brief notice of the age and death of Noah forms the con- 
clusion of this part of the book. 18 — 29. 

Part V. Chap. x. 1 — xi. 9. 

This part may be subdivided into two sections. The 
first, x. 1 — 32, is a brief genealogical notice of the imme- 
diate descendants of Noah's sons, comprehending also cer- 



86 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

tain nations or colonies of which they were the founders. 47 
The historian reverses the order which he elsewhere fol- 
lows, beginning with Japheth and ending with Shem. He 
takes particular notice of Nimrod, a grandson of Ham, who, 
by founding an important monarchy, and, according to the 
view given of his character by some Eastern historians, by 
tyrannical and oppressive conduct, acquired a disgraceful 
and unenviable celebrity, x. 1 — 9. 48 

The principal cities of his kingdom, and those which 
were perhaps first established, were Babylon, Edessa, 
Nesibis, and Ctesiphon, 49 (the metropolis of Chalonitis,) in 
the country of Babylonia, which must be considered as 
stretching to a considerable extent. 10. In connexion most 
probably with the history of Nimrod, is the brief notice of 
Ashur's emigration from that country, and of his building 
three cities, the principal of which was Nineveh, ll. 50 Shem 
is introduced as the ancestor of the Hebrews, and as the 
elder brother of Japheth, 21. 50 The division and settlement 
of the earth are mentioned as contemporaneous with Peleg, 
and giving rise to his name. 25. His brother Joktan's des- 
cendants are then introduced. 26 — 32. 

The second section, xi. 1 — 9, contains an account of the 
confusion of the one language, which was employed by 
all the descendants of Noah. A body of men travelling 
from the country beyond the Tigris, 52 settled in the plains of 
Babylonia, and proposed to build a city and a very lofty 
tower, with the view of acquiring distinction both among 
their contemporaries and with posterity, and, by forming 
themselves into a strong and well guarded community, to 
prevent their being forcibly dispersed. 1 — 4. 53 It would 
seem that these men designed to oppose the divine inten- 
tion, which required mankind to spread themselves in various 
regions of the earth. But God determines to frustrate their 
wily project. Should this first enterprise be allowed to 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 87 

succeed, they will increase in hardy rebellion, and go on 
unrestrained in wickedness. He resolves to confound their 
language, and thus, by awakening suspicion of each other, 
to involve their scheme in utter ruin. 54 The consequence 
was, they were widely dispersed ; the projected city re- 
mained unfinished ; and a name was given it, indicating the 
confusion, 55 which had been attended with consequences so 
disastrous to human arrogance. 5 — 9. 

Part VI. Chap. xi. 10—26. 

We have here a list of Shem's descendants in the line 
from which Abram sprang. This, together with that which 
is introduced in the fifth chapter, completes the genealogy 
of the distinguished Hebrew patriarch, whose biography 
immediately follows. 56 

Part VII. Chap. xi. 27— xxv. 11. 

The sacred writer now presents us with the history of 
Abraham. The narrative treats of the immediate ancestors 
of the Hebrew nation, and is therefore more particular and 
diffuse than that which had preceded it ; which is a mere 
introductory sketch, intended to prepare for the subsequent 
account. This part begins by mentioning the birth of Abra- 
ham, and ends with a notice of his death. 

Terah the father of Abram removes with his family 57 
from the land of their nativity, " Ur of the Chaldees," a dis- 
trict lying in the north-eastern part of Mesopotamia, and in 
modern times reduced to a desolate waste. We are told 
that their place of destination was the land of Canaan, but 
that after reaching Haran, a city (or district) situated in the 
north-western part of Mesopotamia on the Euphrates, they 
continued there until after the death of Terah. 58 This re- 
moval was made in consequence of a divine direction com- 



88 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

municated to Abram, which was probably repeated after 
his father's death. 59 It was accompanied by a signal bene- 
diction, involving, among other promises, the coming of the 
great descendant of the patriarch, the Messiah, with bless- 
ings to be dispensed to all mankind. 80 Abram obeyed, and 
he and his party left Haran and went to Canaan, xi. 27 — 
xii. 5. 

Entering the land at the north, they gradually advanced 
towards the south, and were obliged, in consequence of a 
famine, to take refuge in Egypt. Apprehensive lest the 
beauty of his wife should induce the Egyptians to put him 
to death, in order to secure her person, Abram represented 
her as his sister. Efforts were immediately made by the 
monarch to procure her as a wife, and with this view the 
patriarch was treated with great kindness. Some divine 
inflictions, the nature of which is not stated, most probably 
led to more particular inquiries ; and on ascertaining that 
the supposed sister of Abram was in reality his wife, she and 
the whole party were honorably dismissed. 6 — 20. 

On returning into Canaan, the wanderers were obliged to 
separate into two divisions. They had now become so 
wealthy, and their flocks so numerous, that it was found im- 
possible to settle in one spot. It is evident, from the tenor 
of the whole narrative, that the population of Canaan was at 
this period very sparse. There were indeed several nations 
already settled in the land, dwelling perhaps in towns and 
adjacent districts ; but much of the open, champain country 
was still unoccupied. Abram therefore proposed to his 
kinsman Lot, between whose herdsmen and his own a con- 
tention had arisen, probably on the subject of pasturage, to 
direct his course to whatever region should be agreeable to 
him, promising that he himself would take another direction. 
Lot chose the valley of the Jordan, the fertility of which, on 
account of the abundant supply of water which the river 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 89 

afforded, is expressed by comparing it to the garden of Eden 
and to Egypt. 61 The natural advantages of the situation 
were, however, more than counterbalanced by the depravity 
and wickedness of the neighboring citizens, whose conduct 
was habitually distressing to this righteous man. 2 Pet. ii. 7, 
8. On the removal of Lot, God renews the promise to 
Abram, that his posterity should become exceedingly nume- 
rous, and possess the country in which he was then migra- 
ting. Immediately after this communication, the patriarch 
fixed his residence in Hebron, 62 and, " as his manner was," 
raised an altar to the honor of the Lord. xiii. 1 — 18. 

Certain eastern kings, among whom the king of Persia 
appears to be the most important, 63 wage war against the 
kings of Sodom and the cities in that vicinity, who had 
thrown off the yoke that for twelve years had oppressed 
them. After ravaging the neighboring country, 64 routing 
and destroying the inhabitants, they are met by the king of 
Sodom and his allies, who are defeated in the bituminous 
valley of Siddim. Lot and his family fall into the hands of 
the victors, and are carried off as captives. One of the pri- 
soners escaped, and informed Abram of his kinsman's misfor- 
tune. Immediately the patriarch armed his people, natives 
of his own establishment, to the number of three hundred 
and eighteen, 65 followed the retreating foe to the northern 
district of Palestine, divided his party into two bands, 
routed the victors, pursuing them into Syria, and recovered 
both the property and the persons that had been seized and 
carried off. On his return, he was met by the king of 
Sodom, 66 and also by Melchisedek. The latter personage 
was king of a city called Salem, and also a priest of the true 
God. He brought with him refreshments for Abram and 
his army, and blessed him in the name of the most high. 
The patriarch received his benediction and gave him a tenth 
of the spoils ; thus recognizing Melchisedek's superiority and 
12 



90 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

also his sacerdotal character. 67 With commendable libe- 
rality, the king of Sodom urged Abram to retain the spoils, 
and return the liberated captives. But the noble generosity 
of Abram induced him to decline all personal advantage. 
xiv. 1—24. 

After the event just related the divine promise of protec- 
tion and blessing was renewed to Abram. The patriarch 
represents to the Lord that he is likely to die childless, and 
a stranger to inherit his estate. 68 But the assurance is given 
him that his own son shall be his heir, and that his posterity 
shall be countless, like the stars. Abram believed the decla- 
ration, however apparently improbable, and was accepted 
by the Lord as righteous, on account of his faith, xv. 1 — 6. 69 
At his request, a sign is given him in order to strengthen his 
confidence in the promise of possessing the land in which he 
sojourned. He is directed to provide a sacrifice, which he 
prepares, according to the ordinary and perhaps prescribed 
usage. Towards sunset, he falls into a deep sleep, accom- 
panied by great distress : he is informed, that his posterity 
shall reside in a foreign land, and be afflicted four hundred 
years ; that the people whom they were to serve, should be 
severely punished, while they should be delivered and come 
out greatly enriched ; 70 that he himself should in very ad- 
vanced life be taken to his fathers ; and that, on the expira- 
tion of the fourth age or century,* his descendants should 
return to Canaan, when the growing iniquity of the inhabi- 
tants would require the divine vengeance. 7 — 16. A smok- 
ing furnace and a burning lamp, emblematic perhaps of the 
afflictions which were to be undergone in Egypt, (compare 
Deut. iv. 20 ; Jer. xi. 4,) and of the Almighty's protection, 
consolation, and guidance, which were to be extended to the 
sufferers, (compare Isa. lxii. 1 ; Ps. cxix. 105 ; Job xxix. 3,) 

* See the note in Jahn's Introduction, p. 212. 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 91 

passed between the pieces of the victims ;" the divine pro- 
mise is renewed, and the whole extent of country, from 
Egypt 72 to the Euphrates, is pledged to the posterity of the 
father of the faithful. 17—21. 

As the barrenness of Sarai, Abram's wife, seemed to pre- 
sent an insuperable barrier to the fulfilment of the promise 
through her, he is induced, by her suggestion, to have inter- 
course with her Egyptian maid Hagar. Contempt and in- 
solence on the part of the servant were the very natural re- 
sult ; and thus the impropriety of the conduct of Abram and 
his wife, and the mischievous consequences of polygamy or 
concubinage, are strikingly illustrated. Sarai's harsh usage 
led Hagar to leave her mistress, with the view of escaping 
to her native country. A divine communication directs her 
to return to the patriarch's family, and promises her a nu- 
merous offspring, to descend from the son of whom she is 
soon to become the mother. A name is given to the yet 
unborn, indicative of God's regard for his people's affliction. 
The character by which his race is described, indomitable, 
though constantly engaged in strife and opposition, aptly 
applies to the Arabs, 73 his lineal descendants ; whose resi- 
dence is also geographically pointed out, as east of that of 
the Hebrews, xvi. 1 — 12. 74 Hagar's grateful recognition of 
the divine presence and blessing, in appearing to her, and at 
the same time allowing her the continued use of her bodily 
senses and vital powers, gives rise to the name of the well 
or spring at which the divine appearance took place. 75 Re- 
turning to Abram, she no doubt informed him of the parti- 
culars of this communication ; and, on the birth of the ex- 
pected son, he called his name Ishmael, (b&JfatEP, God 
will hear,) in accordance with the prediction made to the 
mother. 13—16. 

This is followed by another divine appearance to Abram, 
in which the promise is renewed, accompanied by the assure 



92 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

ance, that his posterity shall comprehend many nations ; an 
assurance which implies, that true believers of every age 
and clime shall be regarded as his spiritual children, and be 
blessed with him. In reference to this, his name is changed 
into Abraham, 76 and circumcision is instituted as a sign and 
pledge of God's covenant, 77 with the threat of excision de- 
nounced against any who should refuse to obey. xvii. 1 — 14. 73 
A slight change in the name of Abraham's wife, indicative 
either of a numerous progeny or of some increase of dignity, 
precedes an emphatic benediction. 15 — 16. At the promise 
of a son, various emotions were probably excited in the 
bosom of the aged patriarch. Joy was doubtless predomi- 
nant ; but it is natural to suppose, that even in faithful Abra- 
ham this feeling could not be uniform, and that some degree 
of distrust would occasionally cloud the bright view opening 
before his faith. Were it otherwise, he would not be a 
model of human virtue, but at least of angelic excellence. 
Hence his expressions of doubt, and his prayer that Ishmael, 
the child already born, might be the object on whom the divine 
blessing should descend. 17, 18. 79 But the promises are to 
be verified through another son, whose name indicates his 
parents' joy, and whose birth is to take place a year after. 
Ishmael indeed is to be blessed with numerous descendants, 
and with a princely race, but the covenant is to be estab- 
lished with Isaac. 19 — 22. In his 99th year, Abraham sub- 
mits to the painful rite of circumcision, and with him all the 
males of his family, his son Ishmael being thirteen years 
old. 23—27. 

Another divine communication is made to Abraham, under 
very remarkable and peculiar circumstances. He is sitting, 
in the heat of the day, at the door of his residence among 
the oaks of Mamre. Three men make their appearance, to 
whom he offers his hospitable and respectful attentions, 
xviii. 1 — 8. At first, he appears to regard them as travel- 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 93 

lers, as Lot also did the two angels who afterwards went to 
Sodom. (See xix. 1 ss., and compare Heb. xiii. 2.) But, at 
the inquiry for Sarah, and the renewal of the promise of a son 
by her about the same time in the following year, 80 he doubt- 
less recognized the celestial nature of his guests. 81 Sarah is 
reproved for her want of faith, indicated by her laughter ; 
after which the men, as they seemed to be, directed their 
course towards Sodom, respectfully attended by the patri- 
arch. 9 — 16. The divine determination to communicate to 
Abraham the approaching destruction of Sodom and Go- 
morrah, is mentioned as a consequence of his fidelity and 
obedience. Encouraged by such condescension, he pleads 
with the Lord as his " friend," (see Isa. xli. 8 ; James ii. 
23,) and secures the promise, that the guilty cities shall be 
spared, even if they should contain no more than ten right- 
eous persons. 17 — 33. 

In the same evening probably, (compare xviii. 33 ; xix. 1, 
15, 27,) the two angels approach the gate of Sodom, where 
Lot was sitting. Yielding to his importunity, they enter his 
house and partake of his hospitality. Perhaps the human 
appearance which they had assumed was unusually beauti- 
ful and attractive, as the vicious inhabitants assault the 
patriarch's residence for the most atrocious purpose, the 
execution of which he endeavors to prevent by an offer, 
which at first view appears scarcely less shocking. 82 The 
abandoned wretches become enraged that a mere temporary 
resident among them should undertake to thwart their views, 
and they direct their attack against Lot himself. He is 
rescued from injury by his guests, who secure him in the 
house, and smite the men without with blindness, xix. 1 — 11. 
They then communicate to Lot the purpose of God to des- 
troy the place, and direct him to remove his family and 
connexions. His sons-in-law disregarded his intreaties ; and 



94 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

the next morning, Lot himself, with his wife and two daugh- 
ters, urged and assisted by the angels, leave the city and are 
directed to escape with all possible speed to the mountain 
district. At the earnest solicitation of Lot, he is allowed to 
take refuge in Zoar, a small place in the neighborhood, 
which is saved from the general destruction. 12 — 22. At 
sunrise, Lot enters the place of his promised security, and 
the cities of the plain are entirely destroyed by means of 
thunder and lightning sent by the Lord. 83 The patriarch's 
wife, too, looking back, and perhaps loitering in the way with 
the hope of securing some valuable portion of property,* 
contrary to the divine command, "look not behind thee, 
neither stay thou in all the plain," (v. 17,) is overtaken by 
the raging tempest. Suffocated perhaps by the vapor of 
the sulphur and bitumen, and encrusted by the acrid matter 
with which the atmosphere was filled, she remained a monu- 
ment of divine displeasure. 84 

The next morning Abraham's attention is eagerly turned 
towards the place of his nephew's residence, the destruc- 
tion of which is but too surely indicated by the volumes of 
thick smoke that are bursting out. But his piety and prayer 
had not been forgotten : " God remembered Abraham," and 
saved Lot. Apprehending, however, a renewal of the 
calamity, which must make Zoar itself insecure, Lot retreats 
farther towards the mountains, and takes up his abode in a 
cave, accompanied by his two daughters. Their incestuous 
intercourse with him after they had made him intoxicated, 
results in the birth of two sons, to whom names are given 

* The probability of this representation is supported by the words 
of our Lord in Luke xvii. 30 — 32. " In the day when the son of man is 
revealed, he which shall be upon the house top, and his stuff in the 
house, let him not come down to take it away ; and he that is in the 
field, let him likewise not return back. Remember Lot's wife." 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 95 

which express, though obscurely, their parentage. From 
these the Moabites and the Ammonites derived their descent. 
27— 38. 85 

The history now proceeds to relate an incident in Abra- 
ham's life, which probably took place some time before. 86 
Removing to the south of Palestine, he settled for a time in 
Gerar, a city lying in the lower district of Philistia. (See 
Gen. x. 19, and xxvi. 1.) Here he again represented Sarah 
as his sister, apprehending that her attractions might lead to 
his personal injury. Abimelech, the king of the place, took 
her with the intention of making her his wife ; but, obedient 
to a divine warning communicated to him in a dream, ac- 
companied also by the information, that Abraham was a 
sacred person who had intercourse with God, 87 he restored 
her to her husband. As a mark of respect, he added valua- 
ble presents, and offered the patriarch a settlement in any 
part of his country. The culpable deceit which had been 
practised on him he reproves, with remarkable delicacy 
mingled with sarcasm ; 88 and, at the prayer of Abraham, the 
distress with which his family had been afflicted, was re- 
moved, xx. 1— 18. 89 

The narrative now resumes its regular order. Sarah be- 
comes mother of a son, whom she calls Isaac, in allusion to 
the laughter which the promise of his birth had occasioned, 
and the joy which the event itself produced, (xvii. 17, xviii. 
12 — 15, xxi. 6.) At the age of eight days the child is cir- 
cumcised ; and, at a proper time, he is weaned. As this 
occasion was attended by unusual festivity, the envy of 
Ishmael seems to have been excited, and he shows his con- 
tempt for his father's legitimate son and favorite by some 
insulting behaviour. 90 The jealous Sarah's indignation is 
roused, and she requires Abraham to dismiss the offender 
and his servant mother. The patriarch's great reluctance 
to comply with his wife's request is removed by a divine 



96 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

communication, directing him to acquiesce, accompanied 
with the promise that, although his distinguished progeny 
should descend from Isaac, yet his son by Hagar should be- 
come the ancestor of a nation, xxi. 1 — 13. The next day 
Hagar and her son are dismissed, and she bends her course 
towards Egypt. She seems to have lost her way ; for she 
is represented as wandering in a wilderness. Ishmael, a lad 
of about thirteen years of age, becomes exhausted, and his 
unfortunate mother, reduced almost to a state of desperation, 
places 91 him under one of the small trees, in expectation of 
his speedy death. But, in the extremity of her affliction, 
God interposes. He renews his former promise, (xvi. 10,) 
directs her attention to a spring of water, which she had 
overlooked, and thus rouses her drooping energies. Hagar 
and her son take up their residence in the uncultivated region 
of Paran, on the south of Palestine, (Num. xiii. 3,) and, in 
due season, she procures him a wife from her native country. 
14 — 21. The chapter concludes by giving an account of a 
treaty of peace and friendship entered into by Abraham and 
the Philistine king. It is confirmed by a mutual oath, made 
at a well, that had been dug by the former, and forcibly 
seized by the servants of the latter, without his knowledge. 
It is restored to the rightful owner, who consecrates the spot 
to the worship of Jehovah. 22 — 34. 

Some time after these transactions, the most remarkable 
event in the life of Abraham took place. It pleased God 
to subject him to a severer trial than any which he had 
himself sustained, or which has ever fallen to the lot of 
mortals. He is commanded to go to the mountainous country 
of Moriah, 92 and there to sacrifice the son of his affection. 
Certain of the divine origin of the direction, the man, who 
was already so distinguished for his faith and obedience, 
complies. Assisted by two of his servants, he prepares wood 
suitable for the purpose, 93 and, without delay, sets out on his 



ANALYSIS OP THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 97 

melancholy journey. On the third day he descries the ap- 
pointed place, and, informing his attendants that he and his 
son would go some distance further to worship, and then re- 
turn, 94 he proceeds to the spot. To the touching question of 
his son respecting the victim to be offered, he replies by ex- 
pressing his faith that God would himself provide the sacri- 
fice ; and probably he availed himself of this opportunity to 
communicate the particulars of the divine command. 96 
Isaac submits to the will of God thus expressed, and is just 
about to perish by his father's hand, when Jehovah's angel 
interposes and prevents the fatal stroke. A ram, that had 
become entangled in a thicket, is seized and offered ; and a 
name is given to the place, indicating the Lord's gracious 
interference in relieving his faithful servants in the severest 
of trials, xxii. 1— 14. 96 The promise before made to Abra- 
ham, of numerous descendants, superior in power to their 
enemies, and of the blessings which his spiritual progeny, 
and especially the Messiah, were to extend to all mankind, 
is again repeated and confirmed in the most solemn manner. 
Jehovah swears by himself, (comp. Heb. vi. 13, 17,) that 
such shall be the reward of the patriarch's uncompromising 
obedience. The whole of this extraordinary transaction 
being ended, 97 Abraham returns with his son and attendants y 
to his residence at Beersheba. 15 — 19. 

The historian now proceeds to mention the offspring of 
Nahor, no doubt with a particular view to Rebecca, who is 
soon to appear as Abraham's daughter-in-law. 20 — 24. He 
then gives an account of Sarah's death, and of the negocia- 
tion with the Hittites for a sepulchre. It is difficult to de- 
termine which is most worthy of admiration, the beautiful 
simplicity of the account, or the noble, benevolent, and truly 
gentlemanly bearing of both the honorable parties. The 
field of Machpelah, which lay east of Mamre, is legally 
secured to the patriarch, and the remains of Sarah are de~ 



98 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

posited in its cave, xxiii. 1 — 20. 08 This is followed by the 
equally simple and interesting narrative of the successful 
effort to procure a suitable wife for Isaac. Abraham sum- 
mons his most aged servant, and requires him to swear by a 
solemn oath not to marry his son to a native of Canaan, but 
to resort to some member of the family still residing in 
Mesopotamia. On no consideration is Isaac to settle in that 
country. The Lord under whose protection he himself has 
ever lived, will give success to the undertaking. Should, 
however, the woman applied to decline the offer with the con- 
dition of coming to Canaan, the conscientious and venera- 
ble servant is released from the obligation of his oath. xxiv. 
1 — 9. The whole deportment of the aged domestic in 
managing the trust committed to him, is an affecting illus- 
tration of his extraordinary worth. Regard for his master's 
interest and happiness, and the most unaffected and devoted 
piety to God, are plainly the governing principles by which 
he is actuated. Arrived at the place of his destination, he 
stops near evening at a well, and supplicates the God of his 
master to crown his enterprise with success, and to grant 
him a particular token to that effect. With devout wonder 
he is soon made to perceive that his prayer is heard. Re- 
becca, at the well, refreshes him with a cooling drink, eases 
the aged man of the labor of drawing water for his camels, 
and invites him to her father's house. The gratitude of 
Abraham's servant expands in praise to Abraham's God. 
10 — 28. On the invitation of Laban, the brother of Re- 
becca, the servant enters the house ; but no considerations 
can induce him to take any refreshment, until he has made 
known the purpose of his visit. The influence of a kind 
Providence is too clear to be questioned, and the consent of 
both father and brother" is given without any hesitation. 
Rebecca declares herself willing to leave her native land, 
and to settle in Canaan as the wife of Isaac ; and the next 



ANALYSIS OP THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 99 

day, with the blessings of her family, she accompanies the 
faithful messenger. On arriving at Abraham's dwelling, 
she becomes the wife of Isaac, who shows the respect and 
affection with which he regarded her, by appropriating 
for her reception the apartments of his beloved mother. 
29—67. 

The preceding detailed account is followed by a brief 
notice of Abraham's marriage to Keturah, by whom he had 
several children. 100 Probably these and Ishmael 101 were ap- 
portioned by him in his life-time, and settled in the east, 
apart from Isaac, the divinely appointed heir. At the age of 
one hundred and seventy-five the patriarch died, and was 
buried by his two eldest sons, in the cave which he had 
purchased from the Hittites. xxv. 1 — 11. 

Part VIII. Chap. xxv. 12—18. 

We have here a list of IshmaePs sons, the twelve princes 
whose births were before announced to Abraham, xvii. 20. 
It is followed by a notice of the death of their father, and 
also of the geographical position of the country in which 
they lived, east of that afterwards occupied by the Is- 
raelites. 102 

Part IX. Chap. xxv. 19— xxxv. 29. 

This part resumes the history of Isaac, and continues h 
until the period of his death. 

The faith of Isaac in the divine promise of numerous off- 
spring was subjected to a long trial. At last, twenty years 
(comp. xxv. 20 and 26,) after his marriage, Rebecca became 
pregnant with twins. Agitated and distressed by her situa- 
tion, she utters her feelings before the Lord. The divine 
answer informs her, that the children are destined to become 



100 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

the progenitors of two nations, and that the one which shall 
descend from the first-born shall be subject to that which is 
to be derived from his younger brother. The birth of the 
two children, which takes place soon afterwards, by verify- 
ing the former part of the prediction, becomes a pledge of 
the fulfilment of the latter. The growth of hair which 
makes the elder remarkable, and unlike ordinary infants, 
suggests an appropriate name, and the circumstance that his 
heel was held by the hand of his brother, gives rise to the 
name of the younger. 103 Esau became skillful in hunting 
and out-door exercises, and Jacob was a religious man, 104 
without a settled residence. The former was his father's 
favorite; the latter was the darling of his mother. 19 — 28. 
But little is said of the early history of these sons of Isaac. 
The only fact stated is by no means honorable to either. 
While Jacob is preparing some vegetable food, of a red 
color, Esau comes home from the field, exhausted with fa- 
tigue, and requests his brother to give him what he is pre- 
paring. Jacob requires him to relinquish the privileges of his 
birth, and under the solemnity of an oath, in which unreason- 
able demand Esau seems to acquiesce without any hesita- 
tion. The food thus dearly purchased is consumed, and 
" profane" Esau thus despises his birth-right. 29 — 34. 105 

Another famine now arose, obliging Isaac to take up his 
residence in the country of the Philistines, which, as it lay 
on the Mediterranean, could the more readily be supplied 
with the necessaries of life. He is divinely directed not to 
go to Egypt, and the promise before made to his father is 
renewed, xxvi. 1 — 5. During his residence at Gerar, he 
fell into the same weakness into which his father had twice 
been betrayed, and represented Rebecca as his sister. His 
deceit was discovered, and mildly censured by -the king, 
Abimelech, whose character and conduct appear in a very 
.advantageous light. 6 — 11. The prosperity of Isaac natu- 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 101 

rally excited the envy of the Philistines, who meanly stopped 
the wells which his father had opened.* Isaac's increasing 
greatness is acknowledged by Abimelech, who is thereby 
induced to request him to leave the country. He complies, 
and removes out of the immediate vicinity. On opening 
certain wells, he is obliged to contend with the herdsmen of 
Gerar more than once. Led by the amiable feeling of con- 
cession, he relinquishes his rights ; and when, at last, all con- 
tention ceases, he perpetuates his gratitude by giving an ap- 
propriate name to the well, which his dependants were 
allowed to use without molestation. 12 — 22. Hence he 
removes to Beersheba, and receives another divine promise, 
which leads him to a public avowal of his religious charac- 
ter. 23 — 25. This is followed by the notice of a covenant 
entered into between Isaac and Abimelech, and confirmed 
by an oath. Hence the name of the place, where the ser- 
vants of Isaac succeeded in making a well and procuring 
water, obtains the name of Beersheba, that is, well of the 
oath. 26 — 33. This name had been before given to the 
same place by Abraham, (see xxi. 31, 32,) in allusion both 
to the seven lambs which he had set apart to be received as 
evidence of his having made the well, and also in reference 
to the oath by which the covenant then made was con- 
firmed. 106 A notice of Esau's marriage with two Hittite 
women, who made his parents exceedingly unhappy, closes 
the chapter. 34, 35. 

The next contains an account of a crafty project, formed 
by Rebecca and carried into effect by Jacob, to deceive 
Isaac, now far advanced in age and incapable of seeing. 

* This circumstance is very far from being trifling. In that warm 
climate it was all important, and particularly for nomad shepherds, to 
secure an abundant supply of water. A contest about wells, therefore, 
cannot have been confined to the time of Abraham and Isaac ; it must 
have been of frequent occurrence. 



102 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

He is overheard directing Esau to procure him some food, 
such as he was particularly fond of, that after partaking of 
it, he might bestow on him the paternal benediction. The 
skillful cunning of the mother contrives to pass off Jacob for 
Esau ; and thus the aged and blind patriarch is led to believe 
that he is invoking blessings on the elder son, when in fact it 
is the younger whom he addresses, xxvii. 1 — 29. Scarcely 
had he left his father's presence, when Esau makes his ap- 
pearance with the viands which he had been told to procure, 
and requests his father to partake and to bless him. The 
amazement of Isaac shows itself in great agitation ; and in 
broken accents he informs his distressed son, that Jacob had 
already anticipated him, and taken away the blessing de- 
signed for himself. Then, recollecting probably the divine 
communication which had been made before the birth of the 
children, that the posterity of the elder should be subject to 
those of the younger, he adds the emphatic declaration, 
" yea, and he shall be blessed." 107 Still, this does not pre- 
vent the affectionate father from predicting an inferior bless- 
ing on his first-born, which was in part verified by the revolt 
of the Edomites from the control of Judah. 30 — 40. (See 
2 Kings viii. 20 — 22. 108 ) Jacob's successful deceit so in- 
flamed the passions of Esau, that he expressed his determi- 
nation to put him to death, as soon as a decent time of mourn- 
ing for his father's expected decease should have elapsed. 
This threat leads the watchful mother to urge on her son 
the expediency of avoiding the fury of his elder brother, by 
retiring to the residence of her uncle Laban in Haran. 109 
After an interview with his father, who in all probability had 
become reconciled to the result of the late conduct of his 
wife and younger son, and who renews in his presence the 
prayer for the promised blessing, Jacob leaves his native 
place for Padan-aram, or Mesopotamia, the country of his 
forefathers. He is allowed to depart without attendants 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 103 

and as privately as possible, with the view perhaps of avoid- 
ing Esau's immediate notice, and in the hope of soothing his 
exasperated feelings. After the departure of Jacob, his 
brother, apparently with the view of gratifying his father, 
married into the family of Ishmael. Pursuing his solitary 
journey, the travelling exile must have felt his distressful 
situation. Cut off from the long enjoyed satisfactions of a 
home, and thrown on the world a stranger and comfortless, 
it required the same spirit of faith which had distinguished 
his grandfather, to prevent him from sinking under the bur- 
then of his difficulties. To relieve his anxious mind, the 
Lord appears to him in a dream ; shows him the intimate 
connexion which subsists between earth and heaven, and 
that " divine Providence doth govern all things in" both ; 110 
renews the promises made to his father ; and adds that of 
particular protection to himself, with safe return to the land 
of his birth and inheritance. On awaking, he expresses his 
deep sense of the solemnity of the place ; raises and anoints 
a monument in commemoration of the fact, giving to the spot 
the appropriate name of God's house, (Beth-el ;) and, by 
a solemn vow, devotes himself to the Lord, and pledges 
the tenth of his future property in token of his sincerity. 
41— xxviii. 22. 1U 

Jacob proceeds on his journey, and arrives at the resi- 
dence of his parents' family. His uncle Laban receives him 
with kindness ; and, on ascertaining his skill in pastoral af- 
fairs, expresses his wish to secure his services, xxix. 1 — 15. 
An arrangement agreeable to both parties is immediately 
made, in consequence of which Jacob becomes an inmate 
of the family, with the condition of marrying Rachel, the 
younger of Laban's two daughters, as a compensation for 
seven years of stipulated service. On the expiration of this 
perod, 112 he requires his uncle to ratify the agreement, who 
cunningly substitutes his less attractive elder daughter Leah 






104 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS, 

in the place of her sister, who had so long been the object 
of Jacob's affections. He endeavors to remove his kins- 
man's dissatisfaction, by pleading the usage of the country 
not to allow the younger daughter to marry before the eld- 
er, at the same time offering to give him Rachel also, at the 
expiration of a week, in consideration of services which he 
should render during a second period of seven years. Ja- 
cob acquiesces ; and, as might be expected, is more attached 
to the wife of whom he had long been an accepted suitor, 
than he could possibly be to her unsolicited sister. 113 
Through the influence of divine Providence, Leah's unhap- 
piness in the want of her husband's affections is mitigated. 
She becomes the mother of four sons, to whom she gives 
names expressive both of her domestic condition, and of her 
thankfulness. 16— 35. 114 

In the mean time, the favorite wife of Jacob is un- 
blessed by any offspring. Influenced by envy and an 
unconquerable desire to be honored as a mother, she pro- 
poses to her husband to take her handmaid Bilhah. To the 
first son thus born she gives a name, implying that God 
had espoused her cause ; and the second she designates by 
a term, denoting the struggling efforts by which her attempt 
to vie with her sister had become successful. 115 Her exam- 
ple is imitated by Leah, whose maiden Zilpah also presents 
Jacob successively with two sons, to whom her mistress 
gives names significant of her good fortune and happiness. 
xxx. 1 — 13. 116 The inordinate desire of these women to 
obtain offspring is strikingly depicted in the account which 
follows of Reuben's mandrakes, connected with which is 
the name Issachar, 117 which Leah applies to her fifth son. 
Another son and one daughter are added to her former off- 
spring. 14 — 21. Afterwards Rachel becomes a mother, and 
calls her son Joseph, a word implying increase. 22 — 24. 118 
At this time Jacob communicates to Laban his intention to 



ANALYSIS QF THE BOOfc OF GENESIS. 105 

return to the place of his nativity ; but his father-in-law is 
particularly desirous to retain him in his service, and another 
arrangement is made to that effect. That portion of La- 
ban's cattle -which was designated by particular marks, is 
separated from the rest of the flock : and it is agreed that 
Jacob shall have, for the reward of his attendance, such of 
the increase as shall, notwithstanding the separation, be simi- 
larly marked. By a stratagem, he contrives to effect such 
births as would in the greatest degree advance his interests. 
Thus his own wealth is increased, while that of Laban 
diminishes. 25—43. 

The advancement of Jacob's fortune at the expense of his 
father-in-law, produced the dissatisfaction which might have 
been anticipated. Jacob observes it, and is directed to re- 
turn to Canaan. Aware of the necessity of caution, he holds 
an interview with his wives in the country, at some distance 
from their father's residence. He states to them the cir- 
cumstances of the ease : ' that their father's feelings towards 
him had changed, although he had served him faithfully ; 
that his compensation had been repeatedly altered, 119 under 
the influence of interested motives, deceitfully concealed ; 
that divine Providence had, notwithstanding, protected and 
blessed him ;■ (compare v. 5, 7, 9 ;) that, indeed, the very 
stratagem which he had resorted to did not originate alto* 
gether with himself, but was suggested to him in a dream, 
by the same divine personage to whom he had devoted him- 
self immediately after the communication made to him while 
on his journey to Mesopotamia. And now, his determina- 
tion to return to Canaan is made, in consequence of a com- 
mand issuing from the same divine source.' xxxi. 1 — 13. m 
The daughters of Laban acquiesce in their husband's propo- 
sal without any hesitation, unscrupulously accusing their 
father of having treated them unworthily and wronged 
them. 14— 16. m 

14 



106 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

After making all necessary arrangements, Jacob and his 
family leave the country, availing themselves of the occa- 
sion of Laban's absence. It was not until three days after, 
that their flight became known to him. Immediately he 
pursued the fugitives with highly excited feelings, and over- 
took them at Mount Gilead. A divine communication to 
Laban in a dream prevented a directly hostile attack, to at- 
tempt which he was no doubt afraid ; but he met his son-in- 
law with an angry expostulation, accompanied by a sarcas- 
tic attack on his filial affection, and also a charge of robbery, 
founded on the fact, (unknown to Jacob,) that Rachel had 
stolen her father's teraphim. 17— -SO. 122 A very careful 
search having proved fruitless, Jacob addresses his father- 
in-law in terms of indignant reproach ; tells him of the toils 
and privations which he had undergone in his service ; 
charges him with wickedness and tergiversation; and as- 
cribes his own success to the superintending providence of 
the God of his fathers. 31 — 42. Laban's parental feelings are 
at last moved, and a mutual covenant of peace is proposed, in 
which Jacob eagerly acquiesces. A monument of stones is 
erected in attestation, and named by each of the parties re- 
spectively in his own native tongue. 123 A sacrifice to God, 
followed by a feast, to which Jacob invites the party of his 
relative, closes the ceremonies. The next morning, Laban 
takes an affectionate farewell of his children, and returns to 
Mesopotamia. 43 — 55. 

Jacob proceeds on his journey, and is met by angels. 
The design of this meeting was doubtless to console and en- 
courage him, although the brevity of the narrative leaves 
this to be inferred. As his own party and that of the angels 
constituted two hosts, (Mahanaim,) he applies this name to 
the place. 124 He then sends a respectful message to Esau, 
to conciliate his favor. On the return of his deputation, he 
learns that his brother is advancing towards him at the head 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 107 

of four hundred men ; and, becoming alarmed, immediately 
takes measures for the safety of a part of his company, at 
the same time praying for divine protection with character- 
istic humility and gratitude. In order to omit no act of 
courtesy which might favorably impress his brother, he pre- 
pares a noble present for his acceptance, to be delivered 
with suitable expressions of inferiority and submission. Still 
unable to repress the uneasiness that he felt, he rose up at 
night, with his wives and children, and passed the brook 
Jabbok, with the view of putting them in a place of greater 
security, xxxii. 1 — 23. On this occasion the most remarka- 
ble event of his life occurred. He is alone, praying proba- 
bly for deliverance from the supposed impending danger. 
A being, apparently human, wrestles with him until day- 
break. Not prevailing against the hardy Jacob by ordinary 
effort, he exerts a miraculous power, and the patriarch's 
thigh is contracted. By this, or some other indication, Jacob 
recognized the divine character of his opponent, and ear- 
nestly implored his blessing. He receives it, and at the 
same time his name is changed from Jacob to Israel, a term 
of distinction, implying that he had prevailed over God. 126 
In commemoration of this extraordinary interview, he calls 
the place Peniel, that is, face of God. As a confirmation of 
the fact, it is stated, that the Israelites abstain from eating 
the flesh of the tendon connected with that part of the thigh, 
out of respect to their great ancestor. 24 — 32. 126 

The meeting of the two brothers now follows. Jacob 
approaches Esau with the deepest respect, and is received 
with the most tender affection. The precautions which he 
had taken to secure the safety of those who were dearest to 
him, appear to have been unnecessary, as the kindest feel- 
ing pervades "the breast of his brother, who seems to have 
forgotten former wrongs, and to have yielded to the natural 
impulses of a heart overflowing with affection. The pre- 



108 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

sent 127 which Jacob had prepared is at first kindly refused, 
but, on his urgent solicitation, is at last accepted. After a 
fraternal offer of protection, which Jacob declines as unne- 
cessary, Esau departs for his own country. Jacob travels 
in another direction, 128 and arrives safely at Shalem, 129 where 
he fixes his residence on land which he had purchased. In 
the manner of his religious father and grandfather, he erects 
an altar in honor of the God of Israel, xxxiii. 1 — 20. 130 

The narrative now relates an unhappy event in the life 
of Dinah, Jacob's only daughter, which has an important in- 
fluence on the patriarch's arrangements, and also on the fu- 
ture destiny of two of his sons. Shechem, the lord of that 
part of the country in which Jacob had settled, seduces 
Dinah, and is desirous to marry her. Her brothers were at 
the time from home, superintending their flocks. Being in- 
formed of the circumstance on their return, they are indig- 
nant at the dishonor which Sheehem's folly had brought on 
their father and family, 131 and determine to avenge the dis- 
grace. In order to ensure the accomplishment of their pur- 
pose, they receive the communication of the young prince 
and Hamor his father with apparent satisfaction, acquies- 
cing in the proposal made for the hand of their sister, which 
required that Shechem and his people should submit to be 
circumcised. The father and son agreed to the terms; and, 
by a favorable representation of the advantages to be de- 
rived by forming connexions with the family of a man so 
wealthy and honorable as Jacob, they prevail on their peo- 
ple to consent to the unpleasant condition. 132 When the in- 
convenience resulting from the operation was most oppres- 
sive, and incapacitated the Shechemites for active exertion, 
two of Dinah's maternal brothers, Simeon and Levi, at the 
head most probably of their armed dependants, attacked and 
put to death the unsuspecting people, with Hamor and his 
son, spoiled their city, seized their property, and delivered 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 109 

the injured daughter of Jacob. When the patriarch severe- 
ly remonstrates with them on the criminality of their con- 
duct, they attempt to vindicate or palliate it by the infamy 
which the treatment of the prince had brought on their 
sister, xxxiv. 1 — '31. 

' God now commands Jacob to remove to BetheL He 
obeys, after having purified his household from the remains 
of superstition and idolatry which still clung to some of its 
members. A panic terror, induced by divine Providence, 
seizes the inhabitants of the neighboring cities, and prevents 
them from avenging on his sons the slaughter of the She- 
chemites. 133 On arriving at Bethel, he builds an altar, and 
designates the place by the name which he had before given 
it, prefixing also the name of God. 134 The death and burial 
of Rebecca's nurse is mentioned, in order, most probably, 
to explain to the Israelites the origin of the name of an oak 
subsisting in their time, rather than from the importance of 
the circumstance itself, as Rebecca's own death is passed 
over unnoticed, xxxv. 1—8. Then follows an account of 
another divine communication, renewing promises before 
made and the previous change of the patriarch's name. He 
commemorates the event by setting up a stone pillar, with 
religious rites. 9 — 15. The narrative then mentions the 
death of Rachel, which took place some distance 136 from 
Ephrath or Bethlehem, on occasion of the birth of Benja- 
min; 136 also another removal of Jacob, and the infamous 
conduct of his eldest son.* Then follows a list of his sons, 
all of whom but one were born in Mesopotamia. 137 This 



* The sacred writer most probably introduces this disgraceful trans- 
action to prepare his reader for the father's severe yet just denunciation 
contained in xlix. 3, 4. It would seem, therefore, to intimate the unity 
of plan which pervades the whole book, and is most consistent with the 
theory that it was composed by one author. 



110 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

part closes by an account of the age and death of Isaac, who 
was buried by his two sons. 16 — 29. 

Part X. Chap, xxxvi. 

This chapter is closely connected with the preceding and 
subsequent chapters. At the end of xxxv, it is said of Isaac, 
that " his sons Esau and Jacob buried him." This is fol- 
lowed in the present chapter by a genealogical statement of 
Esau's descendants, concluding with, "this is Esau, the 
father of the Edomites ;" immediately after which, in chapter 
xxxvii, we have an account of Jacob's family.* 

Without interrupting the subsequent history of this family, 
a brief account of the descendants of Esau is here given. 
First, his wives are enumerated. 138 This is succeeded by a 
notice of his sons, and of his removal to Seir, which leaves 
the land of Canaan for the family of his brother. Each of 
these countries was occupied by the descendants of Jacob 
and Esau respectively, agreeably to divine direction. Esau 
gathered all his effects which he had acquired in Canaan, and 
went into another land, 139 away from his brother Jacob. This 
suggests the reason of the procedure. Lot had settled in 
Sodom, leaving Canaan to Abram, xiii. 12 ; Ishmael and 
other sons of Abraham had been removed to the east, xxv. 
6. Esau now abandons the promised land to his brother, to 
whom it of right belonged. The immediate occasion of this 
arrangement is said to be the great pastoral wealth of the 
parties, their cattle being too numerous for the limited pas- 
tures, which the condition of the country allowed them to 

* It would seem difficult to persuade one's self that more than one 
author was engaged in the composition of these chapters. If there were, 
the compiler must have performed his task with extraordinary ability, 
so happy is the combination of originally unconnected fragments which 
he must be supposed to have made. 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. Ill 

occupy. It is to be considered, that the Canaanitish tribes 
were now very considerable, and that the patriarchal fami- 
lies required great extent of country, on account of the mul- 
titude of their cattle, and also of their nomad habits, xxxvi. 
1 — 8. Then follows a list of Esau's descendants for a few 
generations, 9 — 19, he himself now appearing as the father 
of a tribe ; and also of Seir's, the former possessor of the 
country, 20 — 30. U0 A consecutive catalogue of the kings 
that reigned in Edom before the institution of royal authority 
over the Israelites, and a list of certain dukes, complete the 
chapter. 31— 43. 141 

Part XL Chap, xxxvii. 1 — l. 

This last part of the book of Genesis contains the subse- 
quent history of Jacob's family until the death of Joseph. 142 

This was the patriarch's favorite child, and the parent's 
partiality seems to have shown itself injudiciously, both in 
the peculiar attire in which he dressed the youth, and in 
allowing him to make unfavorable reports of his elder 
brothers. The father's undue fondness for this son excited 
the jealousy of the others, and their dislike was increased 
by two dreams of his which he communicated to them, and 
which plainly indicated his future superiority over the whole 
family. 143 These dreams made a strong impression on the 
mind of the patriarch, although he thought proper to 
censure his son for the extraordinary self-importance which 
they seemed to imply. At the age of seventeen, Joseph 
was sent to inquire after the welfare of his brothers, who 
were some distance from home attending their flocks. On 
his approach they resolve to kill him, but at the instance 
of Reuben, who wishes to secure his safety in order to de- 
liver him to his father, he is put into a pit. During Reu- 
ben's absence, a party of Ishmaelites 144 pass along on their 



112 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

way to Egypt, and at the proposal of Judah, Joseph is sold 
to them. His coat is then dipped in blood, and a fraud is 
practised upon Jacob, who is led to believe that his favorite 
had been devoured by some wild beast. In the mean while 
Joseph is taken to Egypt, and sold to Potiphar, one of the 
king's officers, xxxvii. 

The contents of the next chapter seem to have no im- 
mediate connexion with the preceding or subsequent, the 
history of which appears to be thereby unexpectedly inter- 
rupted. If the conduct of Judah with respect to Tamar, 
which is the principal point in the account, were contem- 
poraneous with the sale of Joseph, this may explain the 
reason of its introduction in this place. But it seems very 
difficult to reconcile such a synchronism with dates men- 
tioned in other parts of the history. 145 Judah's failure to 
perform his promise to his daughter-in-law Tamar, by mar- 
rying her to his son Shelah, 146 induces her to perpetrate a 
shameful and wicked deceit, which is followed by the birth 
of her twin sons, of whom Judah is the father. xxxviiL 

The excellent conduct of Joseph, and the prosperity which 
attended all his efforts to advance his master's interests, led 
Potiphar to make him superintendent over his family, and to 
resign to him all his concerns. 147 The beauty of Joseph's 
person attracting the attention of his mistress, subjected him 
to repeated solicitations* the virtuous rejection of which in- 
duced her to calumniate him to her husband, and was thus the 
occasion of his imprisonment. (See Gen* xl. 3* 4, the latter 
of which texts seems to imply that Potiphar had become 
satisfied of Joseph's innocence.) But the favor which di- 
vine Providence had already shown him is still continued, 
and alleviates the sufferings of confinement. The keeper of 
the prison commits the care of its inmates to the faithful 
Joseph, in whose hands every thing is made to prosper. 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OP GENESIS. 113 

At this time two of the king's officers are imprison- 
ed, and put under the supervision of Joseph. After hav- 
ing been some time in confinement, each of them has 
on the same night a remarkable dream, 149 adapted to the 
nature of his office in the court. Joseph explains the dreams, 
and in the course of three days, as he had foretold, the 
event realized the interpretation. 150 One of the officers is 
put to death, and the other restored to his former station, 
xl. Two years afterwards Pharaoh himself has a very ex- 
traordinary dream ; and this is succeeded by another, 
which, in its main points, bears a striking resemblance to. 
the former. These repeated dreams, so peculiar in their 
character, disturb the monarch's mind. He feels that they 
must forebode something unusual, and endeavors to obtain 
satisfaction from the magicians and wise men of Egypt, who 
affected to be able to penetrate into futurity. But in vain. 
The meaning of the dreams lies beyond the reach of their 
keenest sagacity. In this dilemma, the officer who had 
been restored to his place, agreeably to the interpretation of 
his dream as given a long time before by Joseph, remembers 
the Hebrew captive, and relates to Pharaoh the whole ac- 
count of himself and his unfortunate brother-officer, with 
the successful interpretation of their respective dreams. 
Joseph is immediately sent for, and after modestly disclaim- 
ing any ability of his own to satisfy the royal mind, and re- 
ferring to the omniscient God as the only source of know- 
ledge, the dreams are made known to him by Pharaoh. 
He then informs the king that both indicate the same thing ; 
that seven years of extraordinary plenty are to be followed 
by as many of extraordinary scarcity ; and that the repe- 
tition of the dreams denotes the certainty and speedy ac- 
complishment of the prediction. He also suggests to 
Pharaoh certain measures proper to be taken in order to 
preserve the people, during the time of the famine which i$ 
15 



114 ANALYSIS GF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

to waste the country, xli. 1 — 36. Pharaoh shows how 
strong an impression the advice of this prudent counsellor 
had made on his mind, by appointing him general superin- 
tendent over Egypt, inferior only to himself. He accom- 
panies this dignity with suitable external marks of honor, 151 
gives Joseph an Egyptian name, expressive of the great 
benefits which were received from him as the saviour of their 
lives, (comp. xlvii. 25,) 152 and raises him to the highest of 
the national castes, by marrying him to a daughter of the 
priest of Heliopolis, the city of the sun, as the Egyptian 
word On signifies. 37 — 45. Joseph immediately enters on 
the duties of his office, and secures the surplus grain during 
the seven exceedingly prolific years. In the mean time, he 
becomes the father of two sons, to whom he gives names 
expressive of the happy change which, by the blessing of 
Providence, had taken place in his condition. 46 — 52. 

Now come the predicted years of famine. The neigh- 
boring nations apply to Egypt for food ; and Jacob's sons* 
with the exception of Benjamin, the father's darling, present 
themselves before the great lord of Egypt, and make the 
most respectful obeisance to "the dreamer," whom they had 
" sold for a servant." He immediately recognizes them as 
his unworthy brothers. But too well acquainted with their 
real characters, he knew that it was expedient to exercise 
some degree of harshness towards them as a wholesome dis- 
cipline. They presented themselves before him y without 
his father's favorite, his own beloved Benjamin. The sus- 
picion was probably awakened in his bosom, that this only 
other son of his mother had, like himself, been subjected to 
unworthy treatment, perhaps had come to an untimely end. 
Their treachery towards himself he had doubtless long 
since forgiven ; but it became him to take measures in order 
to ascertain his brother's condition. With the view of 
satisfying himself on this point the more readily, he per- 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 115 

sonates the stranger. He accuses them of being spies, and 
puts them in prison. On the third day, he releases them 
from confinement, and retaining Simeon, who was probably- 
one of the most cruel of the band, (see xlix. 5,) as a hos- 
tage, he dismisses the others, with provision for their fami- 
lies, commanding them at the same time to bring to him 
their youngest brother, and thus to clear themselves of the 
charge which he had brought against them. On returning 
to Jacob, and giving him an account of their reception in 
Egypt, of the retention of Simeon, and the demand for 
Benjamin, the patriarch's distress is greatly aggravated. 
The money of each one being found carefully secured in his 
respective sack, 153 adds to the prevalent distress. As a 
circumstance, strange and unaccountable, perhaps it awak- 
ened alarm in their guilty consciences, although they knew 
not why; perhaps also it suggested a seemingly well 
founded apprehension of increased danger to Simeon. The 
anguish which must have been felt both by parent and sons, is 
most strikingly depicted, by the frenzied proposal which Reu- 
ben makes to his father, to allow him to take Benjamin to 
Egypt, and if he did not bring him back, to " slay" his own 
" two sons" ; in other words, to avenge the loss of his favorite 
by destroying two of his grandchildren ! In such a state of 
mind, rational propositions were hardly to be expected. 
The. language of the overwhelmed patriarch as strikingly 
portrays the depth of his affection for the lost Joseph and 
his younger brother ; " my son shall not go down with 
you, for Ms brother is dead, and he is left alone" 53 — xlii. 

But necessity knows no law. The famine increases ; the 
supply of corn is consumed ; and Jacob proposes a second 
application to Egypt. Judah wrings from him a reluctant 
consent that Benjamin shall accompany them. With a small 
present, consisting of the best productions of the ground, 
which circumstances allowed them to procure, and which 



116 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

were usually imported to Egypt in the way of trade, (see 
xxxvii. 25,) and with twice the sum necessary to pay for the 
expected provision, Joseph's brothers again make their 
appearance in Egypt. Now, having substantiated the truth 
of their former statements, they are treated with kindness 
and distinction ; they are brought to the house of the gov- 
ernor, who finds it impossible to restrain the overflowings of 
fraternal affection for Benjamin, his mother's son, and is 
obliged to retire in private to give vent to his feelings. The 
order of the entertainment which follows is doubtless di- 
rected by Joseph. He, his brothers, and his Egyptian 
guests, are separately served, in order that the prejudices of 
the latter should not be offended ; 154 and, to the surprise and 
perplexity of the Hebrew party, they are arranged accord- 
ing to seniority. Agreeably to usage, the master of the 
feast sends portions to each of his company, and the affec- 
tionate brother avails himself of the occasion to show his 
regard for Benjamin, by sending him five times as much as 
any one of the others, xliii. 

It must be evident to every reflecting reader, that it is 
Joseph's intention to make himself known to his brethren. 
Before doing so, however, he thinks it best to discover their 
sentiments and feelings toward Benjamin, in order to ascer- 
tain whether the same unkind jealousies which had marked 
their conduct towards himself, now influenced their treat- 
ment of his brother. He directs his steward to return the 
money as before, and, in addition, to put his own cup into 
Benjamin's sack. Some time after the men had been dis- 
missed, the steward is sent in pursuit, and severely expostu- 
lates with them on the ingratitude of their conduct, and also 
on the folly of it, representing the moral certainty of detec- 
tion. 155 The accusation of theft is repelled with a feeling of 
conscious innocence. If the cup shall be found in the pos- 
session of any one, they do not hesitate to condemn him to 






ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 117 

death and themselves to bondage. The examination results 
in finding it in the sack of Benjamin ; and, in utter confusion 
and dismay, the party return to the city. With the deepest 
humiliation, Judah, who evidently supposes the theft to have 
been committed, acknowledges their crime, and offers him- 
self and his brothers as servants. With an apparently strict 
regard to justice, Joseph refuses to retain in bondage any 
but the offender himself. He permits the others to return to 
their father. This is followed by the most touching address 
of Judah, who remembers the "bereavement" which his 
father had felt in parting with Benjamin, and is aware that 
the retention of this beloved child must bring down the pa- 
rent's " gray hairs with sorrow to the grave." The simpli- 
city, the tenderness, the exquisite pathos of the expostulation 
which flows warm from the heart of Judah, make it as a 
composition altogether inimitable. Any attempt to analyse 
it must be a failure. He begs the privilege of being substi- 
tuted as a bondsman in the place of his younger brother, and 
that " the lad," whose return is essential to the life of the 
worn-out old man, may be permitted to return to his bosom. 
It was impossible to resist such an appeal, "and Joseph 
wept aloud." Dismissing his Egyptian attendants, he tells 
his brethren who he is, consoles them in the distress which 
the declaration occasioned, by reminding them that divine 
Providence had superintended and controlled the remarkable 
events of his life, with a view to the general good. He di- 
rects them to hasten to his father with the joyous intelli- 
gence that " God had made him lord of all Egypt," and with 
an urgent request to come and settle there with his family. 
Natural and appropriate manifestations of affection accom- 
pany the disclosure, and the confidence of his brothers is 
somewhat restored. The intelligence of the arrival of Jo- 
seph's brothers is received by Pharaoh with pleasure, and 
the grateful monarch reiterates the request of his prime 






118 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

minister, and makes liberal provision for the journey of Ja- 
cob's family. Another illustration of Joseph's fondness for 
Benjamin shows itself in a generous donation ; and he dis- 
misses his brothers, either with encouragement not to dis- 
tress themselves with apprehensions of evil, or else with ex- 
hortation not to make themselves uneasy by mutual recrimi- 
nation. The original word ttS^ft, ma y be understood so 
as to imply either of those senses, xliv. 1 — xlv. 24. 

On returning, they communicate to their father the intelli- 
gence of Joseph's being still alive and ruling over Egypt. 
At first the good tidings are too joyful to be credited, and 
when the patriarch is satisfied of the truth of his children's 
account, it is the fact that his dear son is still living to which 
his heart responds : the attendant dignities and honors are 
overlooked. '■ Joseph, my son, is yet alive : I will go and 
see him before I die." This resolution is sanctioned by a 
divine direction, and the patriarch, with all his family, 156 set- 
tles in the land of Egypt. Joseph meets him in Goshen, 157 
and afterwards presents five of his brothers and then his 
father to Pharaoh, with whom he makes arrangements for 
the future residence of the family in that district, xlv. 25 — ■ 
xlvii. 12. 

As the distress occasioned by the scarcity of food in- 
creases, Joseph continues to supply the wants of the Egyp- 
tians, by selling them provisions until their money is ex- 
hausted, after which they barter their cattle, and at last sur- 
render their property and themselves to the monarch. The 
people in general are removed from their respective places 
of residence, and so disposed as best to secure national quiet 
or temporary convenience. 158 The regulations established 
by Joseph either restored the property thus purchased to 
the former owner, or granted him a portion elsewhere, on 
the condition that one-fifth of the produce should be paid to 
the king. This became a permanent law of the land. The 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 119 

property of the priests, however, who were supported during 
the famine by Pharaoh, was expressly excluded from this 
arrangement. 13 — 26. 

The settlement of the Israelites in the fertile region which 
had been assigned them, was marked by advancing prosperi- 
ty and increase. Nevertheless, a permanent residence in 
Egypt, the most distinguished probably among the flourish- 
ing countries of the ancient world, and therefore in point of 
secular advantages the most desirable, was far from the 
thoughts of the venerable Jacob. He remembered the 
promises made to his fathers and renewed to himself, that 
their posterity should possess the land of Canaan ; he could 
not have been unacquainted with the prediction, that they 
were to reside under afflictive circumstances among a 
foreign people, and in the end to be restored to the pro- 
mised country, (xv. 13 — 16.) Calling to mind the extraor- 
dinary interpositions of divine Providence in favor of his 
family ; confidently relying on the fidelity of his almighty 
protector ; and, probably, regarding the temporal blessings 
announced in the promise as emblematic of those spiritual 
and everlasting joys, which God hath prepared for those 
who love and trust him ; he requires of Joseph, with the 
solemnity of an oath, not to inter him in Egypt, though 
famous for the seemingly imperishable character of its 
mausoleums, but to bury him with his fathers in the land of 
Canaan. Assured of being gratified in this wish of faith, 
the venerable patriarch vents the feelings of his gratitude in 
devout thanksgiving. 27 — 31. 159 

After this Jacob is taken sick, and visited by his favorite 
son, who is accompanied by his two children, Manasseh and 
Ephraim. After recounting the appearance of God to him 
in Canaan, and his promise to bless him and his posterity, 
Jacob formally adopts the two boys, placing them in the 
same rank, and entitling them to the same privileges and 



120 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

patrimonial inheritance as his own children. The sight of 
the beloved Joseph awakens in his bosom the feelings of 
affection which he had never ceased to cherish for his la- 
mented Rachel, and he touches on the circumstances of her 
death and burial. The verse (7,) which contains this stroke 
of conjugal tenderness, does indeed interrupt the connexion 
of the patriarch's leading thought. The coldness of affected 
criticism finds here an interpolation ; but it is nature itself 
that bursts out with the interruption, and the mouth does but 
pour forth somewhat of the abundance of the heart. It is 
a solemn moment of sublime religious emotion. The heart 
is full of chastened love. " I had not thought to see the 
face ; and lo, God hath showed me also thy seed." ' What 
a mercy to grant such an end to long endured anguish for a 
son so tenderly beloved ! O, that she, so early snatched 
away, could see with me this joyous sight V Passing from 
the fond recollection of scenes now gone forever, to what 
was then transpiring, and so on to events which still lay hid 
in a remote futurity, he requires his two grandsons to be 
brought to him. After affectionately embracing them, and 
again expressing his devout gratitude, he laid his right hand 
on the head of his younger grandson, and his left on that of 
the elder, although the position in which their father had 
placed them must have required him to cross his arms, 160 
and thus to assume a posture somewhat unnatural. The 
dimness of the patriarch, in consequence of his advanced 
age, prevented him from distinguishing the elder from the 
younger, so that this adjustment, which the subsequent pre- 
diction shows was not incidental, must have originated in a 
divine superintending influence. Joseph was well aware 
that the position of his father's hands intimated the degree 
of the predicted benefaction, and he would have placed the 
right hand on the head of Manasseh, his eldest son. But 
the aged seer, who was better acquainted with the analogy 






ANALYSIS OP THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 121 

of the divine procedure, and with the determination of Pro- 
vidence respecting the two brothers, refused to alter the 
arrangement which he had designedly made. While he 
gave his prophetic blessing to both the brothers, he plainly 
announced that the posterity of the younger should be the 
more numerous, and become a greater people than that 
which should descend from the elder. Both, however, 
should be considered as the sons of Israel, whose name they 
were to bear; and the angel who supported the father 
through all the diversified scenes of his life, and delivered 
him from the various dangers which so often threatened his 
destruction, is invoked, evidently as a divine being, to bless 
the adopted children. 161 The interview is closed by another 
expression of faith on the part of Jacob, that God would 
restore his family to the land of their fathers' pilgrimage, 
and by the notice of a donation of a particular piece of 
ground to Joseph, which his father had forcibly wrested 
from the Amorites. xlviii. 162 

Now follows the celebrated blessing of Jacob, 163 which he 
announced before his death in the presence of his sons.* 

* And Jacob called to his sons ; and he said, gather your- 
selves together, and I will declare to you what shall befall 
you in future times. Collect yourselves and attend, ye sons 
of Jacob, attend to Israel your father. 

Reuben, my first-born art thou, 

My might, and the beginning of my strength, 
Chief in excellence, and chief in might. 

Lascivious, like water, thou shalt not be chief, 

* As this portion is particularly interesting and important, I trust 
that a translation of the whole of it, accompanied by notes more ex- 
tensive than those usually employed in this work, will not be unac- 
ceptable. 164 

16 



122 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

Because thou ascendedst the bed of thy father, 

Then didst thou pollute it : — 
He ascended my couch ! 

Simeon and Levi are brethren ; 
Instruments of violence are their swords. 

In their secret council enter not, my soul, 
In their assembly do not join, my heart, 

For in their anger they slew men, 
And in their wantonness they destroyed a city. 

Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce, 
And their wrath, for it was cruel ; 

I will disperse them among Jacob, 
And will scatter them among Israel. 

Judah ! thy brethren will praise thee. 
Thy hand shall strike the backs of thine enemies ; 

The sons of thy father shall bow down before thee, 
A lion's whelp is Judah; 

From the prey, my son, thou hast gone up ! 
He bent, couched down like a lion, 

And like a roaring lion : 
Who will rouse him ! 

Authority shall not depart from Judah, 
Neither shall he want a law-giver, 

Until he comes to whom it is, 
And him the nations shall obey. 

He fastens to the vine his ass's foal, 
And to the choice vine the son of his ass : 

He washes in wine his garments, 
And in the blood of grapes his vesture. 

Sparkling are his eyes with wine, 
And white are his teeth with milk. 

Zebulon will dwell on the sea-coast, 
A coast well lined with ships ; 
His territories reach unto Zidon. 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OP GENESIS." 123 

Issachar is a strong ass, 

Lying down within his borders. 
And he saw that rest was good, 

And that the land was fair ; 
And he offered his shoulder to bear the burden, 

And became a tributary. 
Dan will rule his people, 

Like one of the tribes of Israel. 
Dan will be a serpent in the road, 

An adder in the path, 
That biteth the heels of the horse, 

And his rider falls backward. 
For thy deliverance have I waited, 

O Jehovah ! 
Gad, a troop may press upon him, 

But he shall press in the end. 
From Asher, rich shall be his food, 

And he shall yield royal delicacies.- 
Naphtali is a hind let loose ; 

He giveth discourses of beauty. 
A fruitful scion is Joseph, 

A fruitful scion at a well, 
The branches shoot over the wall. 

The archers distressed him, 
They shot at him, and hated him; 

But his bow continued strong, 
And his arms were active, 

By the hands of the mighty one of Jacob, 
By the name of the shepherd, the stone of Israel, 

By the God of thy father, who will help thee, 
And the Almighty, who will bless thee, 

With blessings of heaven above, 
Blessings of the deep which lieth below. 

Blessings of the breasts and of the womb. 



124 ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 

The blessings of thy father exceed the blessings of the per- 
petual mountains, 

The desirable things of the eternal hills ; 
They shall come upon the head of Joseph, 

And upon the crown of the noblest among his brethren. 
Benjamin is a wolf, he tears in pieces ; 

In the morning he devours the prey, 
And at evening he divides the spoil.' xlix. 1 — 27r 

After uttering this prophetic benediction relating to the 
future circumstances of his children's posterity, the patriarch 
charges all his sons together, to bury him with his fathers in 
the land of Canaan. Then, having no other communication to 
make, he calmly surrenders his soul to him that gave it, " and 
is gathered unto his people." 28 — 33. 

The tokens of Joseph's filial affection are followed by 
directions to have his father's body embalmed. The cere- 
monies of mourning in Egypt being ended, Joseph obtains 
permission of Pharaoh to attend the remains of his father to 
the place of interment in Canaan, agreeably to the oath 
which he had sworn. Having arrived at the threshing floor 
of Atad, which was no doubt some place east of the Jor- 
dan, 165 well fitted for the purpose intended, the lamentation 
is renewed, and so marked is its character, that it gives rise 
to the name by which the place was afterwards distinguish- 
ed. This second mourning being ended, the obsequies of 
his venerated parent are suitably performed, and the body de- 
posited in the spot so solemnly agreed on. Joseph and his 
company return to Egypt. 1. 1 — 14. 

His brothers, apprehensive lest the decease of their 
father should have removed the only restraint which could 
have prevented Joseph from resenting their injurious treat- 
ment, sent a messenger to him, deprecating his anger in the 
most affecting language, and then went themselves with the 



ANALYSIS OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 125 

Immblest acknowledgments. His reply is such as might 
have been expected from an affectionate and forgiving 
brother, who recognized the hand of divine Providence in 
the most distressful events of his life. 15 — 21. The account 
of Joseph's death at the age of one hundred and ten years, 
surrounded by his family, and avowing the same faith by 
which his ancestors had been distinguished, closes the book. 
15—26. 



NOTES TO GENESIS. 



Part I. Chap. i. — n. 3. 

(1.) Some critics divide the work into nine parts, consider- 
ing the sixth as the commencement of the seventh, and the 
eighth as an appendix to it. But the history of Abraham, 
which is so very prominent a part of the book of Genesis, 
ought to be made a distinct portion. I have therefore 
thought it best to separate the genealogical list of Shem's 
descendants from the subsequent more minute and particular 
narrative, and to make the brief notice of Ishmael's family 
in xxv. 12 — 18, a distinct division, to which it seems to 
have as just a claim as the account of Esau's descendants 
in xxxvi. 

(2.) Comp. v. 14 — 17. The phrase " heaven and earth," v. 
1. ii. 1, expresses the universe. See Gen. xiv. 19, 22. Some- 
times, indeed, other terms are added ; but this is done for 
the sake of emphasis or graphical effect. Thus we find the 
language, " the heavens and the earth and the sea and the 
dry land." See Hag. ii. 6, where the representation is 
figurative, and explained by the phrase " all nations" in the 
next verse; also Ex. xx. 11, which is literal, "the Lord 
made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is." 

(3.) In favor of the former view, the analogy of the book 
may be pleaded, every other division having its own proper 
introduction. But it may be replied, that the introductions 
to the other divisions are evidently inscriptions, while this 



128 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part i. 

appears to be a historical statement of what first took place, 
followed by a continuous account of subsequent transactions. 
The words in ii. 3, ■ which God created in making/ &OS 
fcTife?b would undoubtedly agree with that view, as Flifc^b 
no doubt refers to the continuous narrative before given. 
But this can hardly be considered as decisive, for fctflSl 
in i. 1, may be used in the sense of originally creating, while 
in ii. 3, in connexion with fcYifc^b, it may denote the perfec- 
tion of that original creation by the proper formation and re- 
gular adjustment of the materials ; just as a city is said to be 
built, when the meaning is, that it is only rebuilt and beauti- 
fied. The exposition under consideration seems to be sup- 
ported by the use of fctflSl in ii. 4, where it implies forma- 
tion and arrangement. Thus also in Isa. xlv. 18, the pro- 
phet evidently refers to the language in Genesis : ' thus 
saith the Lord, creator fcfc^iS of the heavens; he, the God 
that forms the earth and makes it ; he establishes it ; he 
did not create it confusion, he formed it to be inhabited,' 
tf^f] Kfffi} fflSO? =lritT-H&- Here the word ana, so far 
from being used to express the act of calling into existence 
a chaotic mass, is evidently synonymous with 12P and fife?, 
and denotes such a creation as produces arrangement and 
accommodation for inhabitants. 

The latter view cannot be maintained on the ground that 
&n!Zt means to create in the sense of giving existence to, for 
this, as has been just seen, is by no means its necessary sense. 
The word JTPtp&niSl may seem to support this view, as in 
Prov. viii. 22, it is used without the preposition, to express a 
period anterior to the formation of the world, as is the cor- 
responding word (BBhE in the same chapter, v. 23. " The 
Lord possessed me in the beginning, fcVipjan, of his way ;" 
" from the beginning, tf 8hfa, or even the earth was :" lite- 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 129 

rally, * from before the earth.' But the nature of the subject 
in Proverbs, which is a truly poetic and beautiful personifi- 
cation of divine wisdom, and the immediate context, favor 
the opinion that these terms denote eternity ; and if so, they 
are inapplicable to the verse before us. It has been thought 
that a clear sense is given to this clause by supposing an 
ellipsis to be supplied from what follows, thus : ' in the be- 
ginning of things, when nothing had yet been created.' So 
Budd^eus, in his Historia Ecclesiastica Veteris Testamenti, 
Halas Magdeb. 1719, 4to. Tom. I. p. 65. But it is plain 
that the question under consideration is not hereby settled ; 
because, if this ellipsis be allowed, it still remains to be de- 
termined, whether the creating referred to denotes the origi- 
nal production of things, or their formation and arrange- 
ment. If the former be the true meaning, the sense of the 
verse and its connexion with what follows, are evidently as 
follows : * At first God caused material substances to exist, 
which being, or becoming, in a state of confusion and dis- 
order, he afterwards formed into a harmonious and well 
arranged creation.' 

Another view of this place presumes the previous calling 
into existence of the mass of matter, and considers the first 
verse with part of the second as descriptive of its condition 
immediately before the creation, the account of which then 
follows. This is given by Rabbi Solomon Jarchi,* who 
maintains that the construct usage of tTtpfc/llSL requires 
some such connexion. After giving some far-fetched and 
extravagant allusions of earlier writers, founded in national 
vanity, he proceeds thus : *p ntoTOSD TOmb tl^n E&l 

nmn nmn -pam pai trstt rms rpE&ns lrrans 
a-ipfcn an abi na -Tr trnba n^i ^ram iirm 

* This commentator is more usually denominated Rashi, ^tlH 
which is a technical word formed from the initial letters of the above 
appellation. 

17 



130 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

nmnb an dats iftnp "ibair> nkib n^in mo hmnb 
•para 'm d^icn na and rOT&ana mrob ib rm *p 
nffl nn» bt» n^nb pirn i^a 1 © anpfcd rwan ^b 
-jwi mraan irobfcfc rwan d^im reb^ m^^i 
d^t»n £ia d^nba and rraand n^ia nsia ^as qa 
wind ^ ndi rfrnn -ib rtftm amd fcrtsand i^ '-en 
ba ^ nfra^i TBirid ndpn bt» imdi tib^rm nftibd 

"Dl 21151^1 " But if you wish to explain the words according 
to their simple meaning, explain them thus : ' in the beginning 
of the creating of the heavens and the earth, then the earth 
was without form, and void and darkness, and God said, let 
there be light.' The verse does not intend to show the arrange- 
ment of the creation, saying that these" (that is, the heavens 
and the earth,) " were first. If it had been the author's in- 
tention to state this, he would have written and rftltiJand 
'"D"l d^lBil £"ia," (that is, he would have employed the 
word n^itD'and and not tl^and.) "For n^an never oc- 
curs in Scripture except in connexion with a following 
word," (that is, in the construct state,) " as we find it in the 
following places : ' in the beginning of the reign of Jehoia- 
kim' ; ' the beginning of his reign' ; ' the beginning of thy 
corn.'* So in this place you should read, ' in the beginning 

* The general usage of iTPtpan is construct, as Rashi says. But 
he is mistaken in supposing that it is never found otherwise. In Levit. 
ii. 12, we have til^b dda Id^pS? ST^'an "(dnp "the oblation 
of the first fruits ye shall offer them unto the Lord;" in Deut. xxxiii. 21, 
lb n^tpan an?], "and he provided the first part for himself;" in 
Neh. xii. 44. tltTO?^! fc^tf.&OS, " for the first fruits and for the 
tithes;" and in Isa. xlvi. 10, tVnHa FPtpanft T?£, " declaring the 
end from the beginning." But these, I believe, are the only places in 
which FPtpan is used, not in construction with the following word, 
although it occurs very often in the Hebrew Bible ; and it is possible, 
that in the first three of these, it may be in the construct with a subse- 
quent word understood. 



S* 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 131 

of God's creating the heavens, &c.,' as if the Hebrew were 
&"n!3 JTIDJaii in the beginning of creating. Similar to this 
is, (Hos. i.2.) ?tiin5 Hin^ini nJngl, that is to say, the 
beginning of God's speaking by Hosea ; and the Lord said 
to Hosea, &c." 

A very particular account of the various opinions, Jewish 
and Christian, respecting the words iH^tpfcOS &*^J2 may be 
found in Gataker's Adversaria Miscellanea, Lib. II. cap. i. ii. 

(4.) The idea conveyed by the original words is evidently 
that of confusion and desolation, as they are used in Job 
xii. 24, Isa. xxxiv. 11, xlv. 18, Jer. iv. 23. The ancient ver- 
sions agree in this meaning. 'Ao'^aros xa» dxaru<fxivas'os f in 
the Septuagint, refers either to the mass being overflowed 
by water and consequently not to be seen, or rather to its 
wild, confused appearance, making it. unfit to be looked at. 
The descriptions throughout the chapter are evidently pre- 
pared in reference to a supposed observer, who watches the 
changes until the wild and desolate confusion gives place to 
a world of perfect order and harmony. 

(5.) The figure is taken from the hovering and brooding of 
birds over their young, in which sense the word is used also 
in the Syriac. Hence the old mystic representation of the 
world under the figure of an egg may have been derived. 
See Vossius de Origine et Progressu Idolatrise, Lib. I. 
cap. v. p. 33, 34. edit. Amsterd. 4to. 1642. 

(6.) It must be evident to the most inattentive reader, that, 
in common with other parts of the Bible, this account 
abounds with figurative language. It is simple, but still 
poetic. God is represented as commanding the various 
creations to take place, where the author undoubtedly in- 



132 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ pa r T r. 

tended to express the idea that they sprang forth in com- 
pliance with his will and by the exertion of his power. 

(7.) The Hebrew term for heaven is derived from the 
Arabic V^j to be high. — The word ?*>p^ is rendered by 
some " expanse," a sense which suits the context, and also 
the etymological meaning of the verb 2j2^ to expand, beat 
out. The common translation, "firmament," agrees with 
that of the Septuagint, ovspswfjia, and of the vulgate, " firma- 
mentum," and is perhaps preferable. If this be the writer's 
meaning, it will not follow that he regarded the space so 
designated as a solid body, in which the sun, moon and stars 
were immoveably fixed: he speaks of things as they appear 
to be, not as they actually are. For this reason I have not 
thought it necessary to alter the ordinary version. 

The word ?* 1 P^ occurs, exclusively of its 'use in this 
chapter, v. 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 17, 20, eight times in the Old 
Testament, namely, Ps. xix. 2, cl. 1 ; Ezek. i. 22, 23, 25, 26, 
x. 1 ; and Dan. xii. 3. It denotes the expanse of the sky 
as visible to an inhabitant of earth, the space in which the 
heavenly bodies appear to be. It is an inquiry of no little 
interest, in what sense the word is used when it first occurs 
in this chapter. Does it here denote the whole space visible 
from earth, comprising that in which are the fixed stars as 
well as the luminaries of our own system? And does the 
writer intend to teach, that God set this expanse or seem- 
ingly solid substance, in which the sun, moon and stars were 
afterwards immoveably fixed, between two vast bodies of 
water, the one constituting the seas, &c, that belong to 
earth, and the other forming, as Gesenius says, " a celestial 
ocean?" And is it in this same sense that we read in Job 
xxxvii. 18, "hast thou spread out, ^PlSn, the sky which is 
strong, and as a molten looking glass ?" and that the Psalm- 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 133 

ist, cxlviii. 4, calls upon "the waters that are above the 
heavens" to hymn the praises of God ? and that God is said 
(Ps. civ. 3,) to "lay the beams of his chambers in the 
waters ?" 

I do not deny that the language of the sacred writer, if 
explained independently of any other considerations than 
such as are merely verbal, would admit this meaning. But 
is this a necessary construction ? It involves a view which 
is inconsistent with the system of philosophy, the truth of 
which is generally and on good grounds admitted. If this 
interpretation be maintained, we must then adopt a modified 
view of the author's inspiration, limiting it to the fact of 
creation and its general outlines, but allowing an intermix- 
ture of error in some of the details ; or else, in defiance of 
ascertained facts, we must reject the Copernican system of 
astronomy. But the interpreter is not driven' to the necessi- 
ty of adopting either of these extremes. If the word ^P*) 
is sometimes employed in its comprehensive sense to denote 
the whole visible expanse, including the region of the stars, 
or at least that in which they are said to be because they 
appear therein, and at other times for that portion of the at- 
mosphere in which vapors float and clouds are formed, 
the interpretation need not militate against the received the- 
ory of the universe. Then the word in v. 14, 15, and 17, 
will express the former meaning, and in 6, 7, and 8, the lat- 
ter. The " waters above the firmament" in that case will 
not be "a celestial ocean," but that portion of the fluids of 
the watery mass which had risen in the atmosphere, and 
was then held in solution, or floated in the form of mists and 
clouds. They may be said to be above the firmament, al- 
though at no very great elevation from the earth, because 
above that part of it in which birds usually fly. Pfeiffer, 
in his Dubia vexata Scripturas Sacrse, 4to., 1685, p. 7, at- 
tempts to make this interpretation ridiculous by remarking, 



134 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

that one might as well say of a man immersed in the midst 
of the sea, that he was above the sea, or of a buried person, 
that he was above the earth, because in each case the party 
was above a part of the element. But it ought to be con- 
sidered, that the language here is popular, rather than philo- 
sophical and accurate ; and a part of the firmament or ex- 
panse, ^Ip"), might the rather be put for the whole and the 
whole for a part, according to circumstances, because the 
whole representation is made as things would appear to be 
to an observer supposed to be below, and not as they were 
in strictness of speech and abstractedly considered. To what 
extent the writer supposed the waters to exist in the atmos- 
phere, is of little importance. The rising of mists, which 
were afterwards to descend as rain to water the ground, is 
expressly mentioned by him in ii. 6. 

(8.) "For signs and for seasons." This is doubtless a hen- 
diadys, meaning ' for signs of seasons,' in other words, to 
designate seasons. That anything "preternatural" is in- 
tended, is entirely unfounded, either in the necessary mean- 
ing of the word, or in the facts alleged to illustrate such a 
sense, which in the present age are universally allowed to 
be ordinary phenomena, arising from natural causes. It 
was therefore with no little surprise that' I read in Professor 
Bush's note on this place the following statement. " The 
heavenly bodies serve for signs, whenever the judgments of 
God or extraordinary events are signified by remarkable 
appearances in them. In this way eclipses of the sun and 
moon, comets, meteors, falling stars, &c. serve as signs, i. e. 
as preternatural tokens or monitions of the divine agency in 
the sight of men. This is the genuine force of the original, 
which very often conveys the idea of a miraculous inter- 
ference." Equally genuine is the application of the original 
word to ordinary occurrences, as the author by the qualifi- 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 135 

cation implied in the phrase " very often" plainly intimates. 
His extraordinary inference, towards the end of the same 
note, founded on the omission of the word " for," is equally 
incapable of support. He considers it as evidence, that "the 
sense of the phrase is undoubtedly ' for days, even years' ; 
implying that a day is often to be taken for a year (!), as is 
the case in prophetical computation." 

Among the objections to which the Mosaic history of the 
creation has been thought to lie exposed, one by no means 
trifling is drawn from the account of the formation of the 
heavenly bodies on the fourth day, while the creation of 
light is ascribed to the first. It has often been replied, that 
previously to the creation of the sun, the light divided be- 
tween the day and night, by being diffused and withdrawn 
according to the will and power of God, who on the fourth 
day concentrated the light in the body of the sun ; and that 
the former method of regulating this vicissitude would have 
been no more difficult for the Omnipotent than that which 
has ever since prevailed. The last remark is unquestiona- 
bly true, although the proposed solution does not satisfy an 
inquirer. He may rejoin, that God does nothing in vain, 
and that the recurrence of evening and morning mentioned 
in connexion with the first three days being exactly the 
same as the following, it would seem to have arisen from 
the same cause. And this view may be defended on either 
of two suppositions : first, that the Mosaic creation is that of 
the earth simply, and that the heavenly bodies are said to 
have been formed on the fourth day, because on that day 
they showed themselves through the purified atmosphere in 
all their glory, as adapted to shed light over the earth and 
to designate divisions of time;* or secondly, that the crea- 

* The coincidence of this view and that of Professor Bush in his note 
on v. 14 will be the more striking, when it is recollected that neither 
writer had any knowledge of the sentiments of the other. For the read- 



136 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

tion of the heavenly bodies may have been contemporane- 
ous with that of the earth. The formation of the sun may 
have been commenced on the first day, and the light then 
called into existence for the benefit of earth's chaos may 
have flowed from his orb, its rays being originally feeble, 
but gradually increasing in strength and intensity, as his 
own creation and that of our globe were both advancing 
towards perfection. There is nothing in the third verse 
which requires the admission, that light burst at once in all 
its splendor upon the unformed material, neither is such a 
supposition consistent with analogy. Gradual formations 
characterize the works of nature, and the Mosaic narrative 
affords no evidence that the original creation was effect- 
ed by instantaneously producing the perfectly constructed 
creature. 

It cannot be denied that such a view is more in harmony 
with the account of the creation effected during the other 
five days, than that which assumes the sun, moon and stars 
to have been altogether created on the fourth. On this sup- 
position, the want of analogy in the aggregate created on 

er's satisfaction I quote the following: "If this history of the creation 
were designed to describe the effects of the six days' work as they would 
have appeared to a spectator, had one been present — a supposition ren- 
dered probable from its being said, ' Let the dry land appear,' (Heb. be 
seen,) ' when as yet there was no eye to see it' — then we may reasonably 
conclude that the sun was formed on the first day, or perhaps had been 
created even before our earth, and was in fact the cause of the vicissi- 
tude of the three first days and nights. But as the globe of the earth 
was during that time surrounded by a dense mass of mingled air and 
water, the rays of the sun would be intercepted; only a dim glimmer- 
ing light, even in the day time, would appear, and the bodies of the 
heavenly luminaries would be entirely hidden, just as they now are in 
a very cloudy day. Let it be supposed, then, that on the fourth day 
the clouds, misis, and vapors were all cleared away, and the atmos- 
phere made pure and serene, the sun of course would shine forth in all 
his splendor, and to the eye of our imagined spectator would seem to 
have been just created ; and so at night of the moon and stars." p. 35. 






CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 137 

each day must strike the most inattentive reader ; and the 
difficulty thus raised in his mind will not be removed by the 
common-place remark, that God could as easily create in 
one day the unnumbered worlds of the celestial bodies as 
the slightest productions of the ground. The question is 
not, what the Almighty can readily do, but what view of 
this part of the narrative best corresponds with the repre- 
sentation made in the other parts. 

It may be objected to. this view, that in reality it assigns 
no specific creation to the fourth day, which merely exhibits 
in clear distinctness the substances previously existing, while 
the same terms are used, expressive of creation, which were 
before employed. But let it be considered, that the princi- 
ple of life and action which was at first infused into the 
mass would still be exerting its energies. The perfection of 
creation would be ever advancing on the fourth day as on 
the former days, until the celestial worlds broke into view 
from behind the vanishing veil of cloud and mistiness.* 
Appearing for the first time, and of course as new creations, 
they would be described as such in the same phraseology as 
had been before used. Besides, the principal point in the 
author's mind is the purposes which they were intended to 
serve for the benefit of man. It is not so much their creation 
on that day, as the uses to which they were to be put, on which 
he insists. The next chapter affords a similar specimen of 
composition, and it may be adduced to illustrate the lan- 
guage under consideration. The point to which the histo- 

* I have for some years entertained the opinion that this is the true 
view of the text. The conclusion arrived at is the result of reflection on 
the history itself and the universally acknowledged facts of natural 
philosophy. The reader will perceive that I hold it in common with 
many others. And it may be worthy of notice that the same view was 
entertained by some of the most learned fathers of the Church. See the 
works referred to in Dr. Wiseman's Lectures on the connexion between 
science and revealed religion, p. 178. 
• 18 



138 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

rian principally directs his reader's attention in ii. 18 — 25, is 
the production of the woman as a suitable partner for the 
man. The 18th verse states the divine intention to provide 
him with such a partner. This is immediately followed in 
the 19th by the words, "And out of the ground the Lord 
God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the 
air." Does the sacred writer intend to teach us that the 
formation of every beast and fowl was subsequent to the 
divine determination just expressed, and of course subse- 
quent to the creation of man himself? This would be to 
contradict the account of the creation as given in the previ- 
ous chapter. He intends to introduce the narrative of the 
manner in which God's purpose to provide man with a suit- 
able companion was accomplished. As it was proper for 
this end that Adam should inspect the various animals, their 
creation is mentioned in immediate connexion with their 
being brought to him, although it had taken place before the 
man himself had been called into existence. The same 
principle may be applied to the account of the fourth day's 
work. It is not necessary to understand the sacred writer 
as asserting the creation of the heavenly bodies on that day, 
but only their developement on that day^ as adapted to the 
purposes intended, the creation of them having previously 
taken place. 

It is probable that some of my readers will consider the 
second of the above named suppositions as more in accord- 
ance with the comprehensive language of the first verse and 
the general representations of Scripture. If the formation 
of some of the celestial bodies began at the same time with 
that of the earth, and if on the fourth day they were com- 
pleted, or sufficiently so for the purposes intended, a popu- 
lar use of language would allow expressions denoting cre- 
ation to be applied to the perfection of their structure and 
organization. Whether this view would not involve the 



CHAP. I — II. 3 ] NOTES TO GENESIS. 139 

interpreter in other difficulties arising out of the physical 
constitution of the universe, requires his serious conside- 
ration. 

If the view maintained in this note be admitted to be true, 
it follows, that the opinion which presumes the author to 
have regarded the planetary worlds as fixtures in the solid 
arch of heaven and appendages to this globe, has not the 
least foundation in this part of the sacred narrative. 

(9.) The use of the plural in this passage has been va- 
riously accounted for. Rosenmueller considers it as noth- 
ing more than the usage of the Hebrew, in common with 
other languages, to employ the plural occasionally for the 
singular. He refers to Job xviii. 2, 3, " How long ere ye make 
^W^STI an end of words? Mark ye &c. ^""iFl. Where- 
fore are we — reputed vile in your sight, tD^JPSl"; 2 Sam. 
xvi. 20, " Then said Absalom to Ahithophel, give counsel 
among you, d!?b ^Dft" ; an d xxiv. 14, " And David said 
unto Gad, I am in a great strait : let us fall, kO?5-" But a ^ 
these places are explicable on other grounds. Bildad ad- 
dresses Job in the plural, because he connects him with all 
who held the same sentiments; as, in Isa. viii. 11, 12, 13, 
God addresses the faithful in the person of his prophet, 
" The Lord spake to me — and instructed me, — saying, say ye 
not — neither fear ye, &c. ; let the Lord of hosts be your fear 
and — your dread." Absalom seeks counsel of AhithophePs 
coadjutors as well as of himself; and David, in regarding the 
divine indignation as directed against his own person, has 
reference also to the exposure of his people. Some other 
passages which have been referred to are also not altogether 
satisfactory in favor of such usage, as the speaker may 
mentally connect others with himself. See Gen. xxix. 27, 
Num. xxii. 6, Dan. ii. 36, and 1 Kings hi. 26, in the Hebrew. 



140 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

Besides, although an interchangeable use of singular and 
plural may occasionally take place, as in Cant. i. 4, " Draw me, 
we will run after thee ; the king hath brought me into his 
chambers , we will be glad and rejoice in thee," and in se- 
veral other places ; yet it does not apply in the present case, 
as the whole clause which expresses the divine determination 
is in the plural. 

Some suppose the plural to be used here in accommoda- 
tion to the language of human dignitaries. Thus Aben 
Ezra on v. 1, speaking of the form d^rib^. U1& 'd^H^ 

nr t&nm d^di pt)b d^nb^ ^ wt> mb& "D&sfciD 
ywb mndi nnd pi -ib w ywb bD t) \\wbTi pi?a 
■jvabdi d^di )r&b b-ran rab ^pn ^^w mb 
d^di p^bd pftn lftd bran idTtn iidd pi b^/2^ 
"im d^di ptDb bm^n by iftib ndd pi »ipn y.^bdi 

" As we afterwards meet with Hlb^, we know that d^tlb& 
is the plural form from that root. Such is the usage of the 
language ; for every language has a mode of expressing 
honorable distinction. In some foreign tongues this is done 
by the inferior addressing his superior in the plural, and, 
in Arabic, kings and great men employ the same num- 
ber. This is also the case in Hebrew." The same prin- 
ciple has been applied also to other texts ; as, for exam- 
ple, to 2 Sam. vii. 22, " according to all that we have 
heard with our ears." But in a prayer to God remark- 
able for its profound humility, it is not to be supposed 
that David would employ the plural as indicative of majesty, 
and such an use never elsewhere appears in the whole prayer, 
which is of considerable length. Undoubtedly, in this clause, 
he connects himself with the nation, as the next verse plainly 
proves : " And what one nation in the earth is like thy people, 
&c." Neither are the instances which have been adduced 
in order to show that the same use of the plural is found in 
Chaldee, satisfactory. Daniel, ii. 23, in his thanksgiving to 



chap. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 141 

God, cannot be supposed to use language indicating his own 
dignity. He associates with himself his friends, whose in- 
tercessions with God he had before desired, (v. 17, 18,) 
when he says : " thou hast made known unto us the king's 
matter." And so also in v. 36, " ice will tell the interpreta- 
tion," the plural may be used for the same reason ; or 
Daniel may appear as the representative of the wise men. 
The whole tenor of his address shows that he had no inten- 
tion of assuming dignity in the presence of the Babylonian 
monarch. Another text, Ezra. iv. 18, may perhaps bear upon 
the principle, but even this is not sufficiently explicit to prove 
it; and if it were, it is of too late a date to illustrate the 
language of Genesis, and being Chaldaic, could not settle 
Hebrew usage. King Artaxerxes does employ the plural 
of himself: " the letter which ye sent unto us" But most 
probably he associates with himself his royal council. The 
language immediately following is in the singular : " hath 
been plainly read before me. and /commanded, &c." Another 
instance of similar usage may be found in Gen. xxxix. 14, 
although I am not aware that it has ever been cited in re- 
ference to the principle under consideration. Potiphar's 
wife cries out to her attendants, " see ("JS 1 ! the plural.) he 
hath brought in a Hebrew unto us, to mock us" But 
undoubtedly she comprehends her attendants, and speaks 
of the asserted insult as directed against all the family. 
Immediately afterwards, speaking solely of herself, she 
employs throughout the singular number. It is very ques- 
tionable, therefore, whether this royal use of the plural im- 
plying authority or distinction, existed in very ancient 
periods ; and modern usage can have no weight. 

Others again regard the phraseology as founded on the 
scriptural doctrine of the plurality of persons in the divine 
essence, one being supposed to address another. This view 
agrees not only with the plain declarations of the New 



142 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part i. 

Testament in which this doctrine is avowed, but also with 
occasional intimations of it given in the Old, and is in 
character with the relative importance of the act of creation 
which immediately follows. Under these circumstances, I 
cannot venture to reject such an interpretation. It may in- 
deed be, that the plural form is employed to denote the 
plenitude of powers existing in God, in addition to the 
plurality of persons. The Supreme may be distinguished 
as the being who manifests himself everywhere and under 
various forms in the powers of nature, and also in the au- 
thorities of heaven. The multiplicity of God's works, as 
well as the mysterious nature of his subsistence, may have 
had an influence on this form of language, by which his 
nature and character are expressed. See Drechsler's Ein- 
heit und Aechtheit der Genesis, p. 14, 15. 

There is, however, another view of this subject, which 
appears to be well worthy of consideration. Rashi explains 
the use of the plural on the ground of divine condescension. 
The supreme being is considered as an elevated monarch, 
surrounded by his nobles, as the great father in the midst of 
his family. The solemnity and deliberation with which he 
enters on the creation of man are described by representing 
the deity as if he had condescended to consult with his 
most distinguished angels previously to the act. The image 
of royalty surrounded by its dignitaries, is sometimes em- 
ployed to delineate the more vividly the character and pro- 
ceedings of God. This figure illustrates the language of 
our Lord respecting little children: "their angels do always 
behold the face of my father who is in heaven," Matt, xviii. 
10 ; that is, they are his most intimate attendants, his cour- 
tiers ever near his throne and favored with his presence. 
Comp. Esther i. 14, " The next unto him (the king,) — the 
seven princes of Persia and Media, which saw the king's 
face and which sat the first in the kingdom" ; and Jer. Hi. 25. 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 143 

" Seven men of them that were near the king's person ;" 
literally, * who see the king's face,' ib^-^S ^JSh. It is also 
the ground of the exhibition made by the prophet Micaiah 
to Ahab in 1 Kings, xxii. 19, " I saw the Lord sitting on his 
throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his 
right hand and on his left." And in Isaiah, chap, vi., we 
find the same representation. The prophet sees the Lord 
sitting on his throne and attended by the Seraphim. The 
language of the 8th verse is particularly worthy of notice 
in illustration of that under review : " I heard the voice of 
the Lord, saying, whom shall I send, and who will go for 
us ?" The holy Seraphs are so intimately connected with 
the great king, the Lord of hosts, that his mission is repre- 
sented as theirs. The purposes, interests, and measures of 
both are identified, and the acts, which, properly speaking, 
are those of the head, are figuratively attributed to the 
members. Thus also the triumphs of Christ, and the judg- 
ment which he is to institute, have been supposed by some 
to be ascribed to his people, on the ground of that spiritual 
union by which both parties become so intimately asso- 
ciated as to be incapable of disunion.* The creation of 
man is of course the act of God alone, but the principle 
illustrated allows us to consider the language which ex- 
presses his intention as an appeal to his holy attendants. 

* The language of Vitringa, in his dissertation, De sceptro Judae 
superstite, nato Christo, in his Observationes Sacrse, Lib. iv. cap. vi. 
§ vii. p. 956, is so well adapted to express my meaning, that I cannot 
forbear citing it. Christi Jesu regnum aliqaod est in mundo, cujus 
subditi sunt omnes electi credentes. Hi proin regnum Christi dicuntur. 
Sed iidem illi in Sanctis literis dicuntur reges, et cum Christo rege suo 
regnare. Non alia quidem de causa, quam quod per fidem et amorem 
tam arete cum Christo voluntatibus suis conjuncti sint, ut quod Christus 
agit dominus, ipsi agere ; quse Christo Jesu ex regni administratione 
nascitur gloria, ipsorum gloria; quam Christus exercet potestatem, 
eandem ipsi in et cum Christo exercere censeantur. 



144 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[PART I. 



They exult in the wisdom and power of the maker, " the 
sons of God shout for joy." Job, xxxviii. 7. They partici- 
pate in the pure delight with which the creator contemplates 
his work, and feel the same complacency as if the act had 
been their own. 

(10.) The image of God is a phrase expressive of excel- 
lence and authority. This is implied in ix. 6, where the 
creation of man in God's image is stated as a reason for the 
capital punishment of the murderer : " Whoso sheddeth 
man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed ; for in the 
image of God made he man." In the eighth Psalm, also, 
supremacy over the inferior creatures is represented as a 
part of that " glory and honor" with which man was origi- 
nally " crowned." This is evident, moreover, from the 
history before us, where authority over the inferior animals 
is immediately connected with the image of God, by which 
man was distinguished. Knowledge and wisdom must 
necessarily be implied ; not, indeed, of that exalted and com- 
prehensive kind which has often been claimed for our first 
parent, but a degree correspondent with that perfection in 
which all the works of God were made. It seems incon- 
sistent to suppose, with Hengstenberg (Christologie des 
Alten Testaments, Vol. I. p. 34, in Keith's Translation, p. 32,) 
and others, that while Adam's body was created perfect, 
his intellect was in the condition of childhood. And on the 
other hand, it is equally objectionable to assume with 
Maimon[des, (rmflfl "mt^, grounds of the law, chap. iv. 
§ 14, p. 45, edit. Vorst. Amstelod. 1638, 4to.) that the intel- 
lectual principle constituted the form in which man was 
created : tDS^n fiTlS &OTO fiSHtt. The most important 
features of the divine image in the first man were doubtless 
his moral purity and holiness. These qualities are referred 
to in Eccles. vii.29, Eph. iv. 24, Col. iii. 10. In the two 



CHAP. 1— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 145 

latter texts they are spoken of as distinguishing " the new 
man which is created after God," in contradistinction to the 
" old man," the sinful character which predominates in the 
natural mind ; and the apostle evidently refers to the image 
of God in which man was originally made. 

Many divines, both ancient and modern, have maintained, 
that the gift of the Holy Spirit constituted the most important 
feature of the divine image in which Adam was created. See 
Bishop Bull's Discourse on the state of man before the fall. 
I have not thought proper to advance this opinion, as I am not 
satisfied that it can be supported by sufficient scriptural proof. 
Certainly Gen. ii. 7, so often alleged in defence of it, is altoge- 
ther inadequate. It expresses the divine origin of the living 
principle and soul of our first parent. 

To represent the image of God as consisting in uprightness 
of external person, in contradistinction to the general form of 
other animals, presumes an ignorance of the divine being in- 
consistent with the character of the writer, and gives a con- 
temptible sense, alike unworthy of the book and incapable of 
proof. Such childish conceptions of God are very little in har- 
mony with the majesty, wisdom, and power, ascribed to him 
in the representations throughout the chapter. Indeed, it may 
well be doubted, whether the erect form in which man was 
created, was even intended to indicate that divine image in 
which his soul was originally made, although such an opin- 
ion has been often expressed and is avowed by Augustin. 
Si ergo et hominem de terra et bestias de terra ipse forma- 
vit, quid habet homo excellentius in hac re, nisi quod ipse 
ad imaginem Dei creatus est ? Nee tamen hoc secundum 
corpus, sed secundum intellectum mentis, de quo post lo- 
quemur. Quanquam et in ipso corpore habeat quandam 
proprietatem, quse hoc indicet, quod erecta statura factus 
est, ut hoc ipso admoneretur, non sibi terrena esse sectanda, 
velut pecora, quorum voluptas omnis ex terra est, unde in 
19 



146 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART It 

alvum cuncta prona atque prostrata sunt. Congruit ergo, 
&c. De Genesi ad literam, Lib. VI. cap. xii. Opera, Tom. 
III. p. 155, edit. Bened. The ground of distinction which is 
supposed to be found in the form of the inferior creatures, 
is insufficient as an argument, inasmuch as it is not true of 
all, especially of birds. 

I consider the language of Dr. Palfrey, in his Acade- 
mical Lectures on the Jewish Scriptures and Antiquities? 
p. 224, 225, (Lect. X.), as utterly unfounded and dis- 
honorable to the intellectual and religious character of the 
great Hebrew lawgiver. " The mind of Moses had not 
yet" (the period referred to in Ex. xxxiii.) been elevated to 
the conception of a purely spiritual deity. How should it 
be ? How can we represent to ourselves the probability of 
such an immense progress having been made by him beyond 
the universal apprehensions of his age ? Moses could have 
had no idea but of a deity with a body ; a body glorious 
indeed, but definite, limited, and visible." Indeed ! Did 
Moses receive any knowledge of God from revelation, or 
was he left to the guidance of his natural powers ? It is 
only on the latter supposition that the author's inquiry has 
any force ; and it is hardly necessary to add, that this sup- 
position implies a denial of his inspiration and divine au- 
thority. " The doctrine alone of Moses, so remote from the 
sentiments and philosophy of his age, and so agreeable to 
truth, creates a strong presumption of his having received 
it by immediate revelation." Dissertation on Miracles by 
Hugh Farmer, chap. iii. sect. iii. p. 148, third edition, Lon- 
don, 1810, 12mo. 

(11.) An attempt has been made to explain these verses 
so as to comprehend the grant of animal food to man, as 
well as vegetable. But the interpretation is evidently forced. 
The express grant of animal food was given after the flood, 



chap, i— ii. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 147 

ix. 3 : " every living thing that moveth shall be meat for 
you ;" but probably such food had been used before, as it is 
fitted to the human constitution, and otherwise a dispropor- 
tionate increase of cattle must have taken place. Indeed, 
it is likely from ix. 4, that some of the antediluvians prac- 
tised cruel abuses, and ate the living flesh. 

(12.) In the second verse, the Samaritan Pentateuch, and 
the Septuagint and Syriac versions, read sixth day instead 
of seventh. But this is probably a departure from the ori- 
ginal text, intended to remove the supposed difficulty of 
God's being said to have finished on the seventh day. The 
apparent contradiction between this and what is said in the 
last of the first chapter, is removed by considering the verb 
here as in the pluperfect. 

The paradisaical origin of the sabbath as a day of holy 
rest and worship, is clearly to be inferred from the text. 
The supposition of anticipative reference to the fourth com- 
mandment is an unnatural assumption. As the Sabbath is 
an institution alike useful and important for mankind in 
general, it were unreasonable to limit its benefits to one 
nation without explicit authority. The intimations, which 
occasionally appear in the book of Genesis, of more than 
ordinary solemnity being attached to the number seven, and 
particularly its use in designating periods of time, are best 
explained on this ground. The sabbath is not indeed di- 
rectly mentioned in the history of the patriarchs, but it is 
probably alluded to ; and if not, the remarkable brevity of the 
narrative diminishes the force of any argument which might 
be drawn from the omission. The manner in which the 
Hebrew law commences, " remember the sabbath day," 
(Exod. xx. 8,) seems to imply that the institution was not 
altogether new, although it had fallen greatly into desuetude ; 
and this view of the subject affords the best exposition of 



148 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part i. 

the narrative, (chap, xvi.) in which the sabbath is originally 
introduced. It is true, that sometimes the law is urged on 
the ground of a different sanction from that first presented, 
as in Deut. v. 15, when the deliverance of the Hebrews 
from the slavery of Egypt is stated as the motive : " Re- 
member that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and 
that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence, through a 
mighty hand, and by a stretched-out arm ; therefore the 
Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath-day." 
But this is not exclusive of the original sanction. It adds 
to it by an appeal to the gratitude of the Hebrews. Thus 
also we celebrate the Christian sabbath or Lord's day, in 
commemoration of our Saviour's resurrection, as well as of 
the creation of all things. 

Since writing the above, I have met with Professor J. G. 
Palfrey's Academical Lectures on the Jewish Scriptures 
and Antiquities: Boston, 1838. In the ninth lecture of this 
work, he states his view of the nature and origin of the sab- 
bath, which he considers as an institution purely Mosaic, re- 
quiring simply cessation from labor, not at all of a religious 
character, and in this respect " entirely different" from " the 
Christian Lord's-day." Although it would not comport 
with the design of these notes to discuss this whole subject 
copiously, yet I cannot but remark on some points in the 
Professor's statements and course of argument, which appear 
to me wholly unwarranted. 

Dr. Palfrey allows the deliverance from Egypt and the 
designation of a covenant between God and the Hebrew 
people, to be the distinguishing characteristics of the Jewish 
sabbath, p. 188, 194. And yet he does not hesitate to say 
as follows : " A Jew who should sit perfectly unemployed, 
or even who should sleep, through the day, would have kept 
the sabbath with a punctilious observance." p. 186. And 
again : " Rest from labor, (which may be mere indolent re- 






chap. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 149 

pose,) I find to be the essence of the Jewish observance." 
p. 197. Is it reasonable to believe that an institution so un- 
meaning in the character of its requisition, which the brute 
creation could be made to observe as punctually and fully as 
man, should have been established by the allwise,and enjoined 
on the Hebrews, by solemn sanctions, as commemorative of 
a great national deliverance, and as a perpetual sign of cove- 
nant relationship with God ? I should be at a loss to vindi- 
cate the wisdom or propriety of an institution having such 
important objects in view, " the essence of the observance" 
of which " may be mere indolent repose." 

The author objects to the application in favor of the sab- 
bath being used as a day of " religious services," which has 
often been made of the question put to the Shunammitess by 
her husband : " Wherefore wilt thou go to him (the prophet) 
to-day? it is neither new moon nor sabbath." 2 Kings iv. 
23. " Nothing is said or implied of worship. The sabbaths 
and the new moons were both holidays, and therefore suita- 
ble for the offering of presents and the visiting of friends ; 
and accordingly, the question is asked, why a day should be 
chosen for visiting Elisha which w T as not the customary 
day." p. 186, note. It will not be contended that any expli- 
cit and definite recognition of divine worship on the sabbath 
is contained in the text quoted ; and neither is there any 
such recognition of what the author supposes to be the os- 
tensible object of the visit. But when we read in Isa. lxvi. 
23, "it shall come to pass that from one new moon to 
another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh 
come to worship before me, saith the Lord," can it be denied 
that sabbaths and new moons were at that time regarded 
as well known and established seasons of worship ? And is 
it not most reasonable to infer that the connexion of the two 
feasts in the former passage, exactly analogous to that in the 
latter, implies that they were both so used in the time of the 



150 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

Shunammitess ? And this, be it remembered, was only 
about a century and a half before Isaiah wrote.* We 
have therefore, in the places before us, ordinary practice 
founded on the law, and exhibiting the national construction 
then given to the law. And wherein could this construction 
have been found but in the natural meaning of the language 
of the law, the " sanctiflcation" of the sabbath which it an- 
nounces, and the "holy convocation" which it requires ? See 
Levit. xxiii. 3. On this latter point the Professor remarks, that 
the " holy convocation appears to mean no more than that 
there should be an assemblage of such as might be within con- 
venient distance, to witness the one national sacrifice, offered at 
the one place of national worship ; or perhaps that there should 
be festive meetings of friends, a use to which we know that the 
day was actually put. See Luke xiv. 1 ; Hos. ii. 11." But 
the command respecting the sacrifice of which he speaks, 
does not occur in the chapter of Leviticus. It is to be found 
in Num. xxviii. 9, 10, to which the phrase in Leviticus can- 
not possibly refer ; nor is it credible that it should refer to 
the same thing, the sacrifice itself, which would then un- 
doubtedly have been specified in the context. But so far 
from this being the case, it is evidently implied that the holy 
convocation is an essential constituent of the sabbatical requi- 
sitions, as also of the other festivals mentioned in the chapter. 
With the text in Leviticus above referred to, compare v. 2, 4, 
7, 8, 21, 24, 27, 35, 36, 37. To limit such convocation to an 
assemblage at the national altar, is therefore inadmissible ; 
because, while some of the festivals were celebrated only in 
that place, others were kept wherever it might be conve- 
nient to the party. 

* The genuineness of the latter part of the book of Isaiah, which 
by universal consent has, until late years, been ascribed to the prophet, 
is here presumed ; and I think has been satisfactorily maintained against 
all the objections which German neologians have raised against it. 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 151 

The references by which the author endeavors to prove 
the second alternative suggested by him, after Le Clerc and 
others, that the ' holy convocation' was a " festive meeting 
of friends," can at the very most only show that such meet- 
ings did occasionally take place on the sabbath, but surely 
not that they constituted an essential part of the requisition 
of the law. If this were the case, it were difficult to see 
how the unemployed or sleeping Jew could have punctili- 
ously observed the sabbath. But the applicability of the 
references is itself doubtful. The first only shows, with va- 
rious other places in the Gospels, that our Lord occasionally 
accepted an invitation to a meal on the sabbath. That any 
'festivity' was connected with those occasions cannot be 
proved. In the only other passage referred to, the prophet 
classes sabbaths with all other solemn feasts, and declares 
that the " mirth" with which their celebration was charac- 
terized should " cease." Doubtless the Jewish festivals were 
intended to be occasions of devout and grateful joy, marked 
at the same time by a generous, though rational allowance 
of the gratifications of life. What we know of human na- 
ture will not suffer us to doubt, that they were perverted to 
extravagant and luxurious indulgence, in proportion as the 
people became vicious and threw off the restraints of reli- 
gion. And this is probably part of the mirth to which Ho- 
sea alludes, although it cannot be doubted that he predicts 
the loss of all the ' gladness' which their joyful celebrations 
brought along with them. But that the sabbath could not 
have been intended to be kept with much festivity or luxu- 
rious gratification of the appetite, would seem quite evident 
from the law which forbade a fire to be kindled on that day. 
See Exod. xxxv. 3. The spirit of the language in Isa. lviii. 
15, is also adverse to such a supposition. " If thou turn away 
thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my 
holy day, and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, 



152 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part i. 



honorable, and shalt honor him, not doing thine own ways, 
nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own 
words ; then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord, &c." 

In considering that view of the sabbath which supposes it 
to be of paradisaical origin, as given in the former part of 
this note, the Professor explains the meaning of the phrase, 
"God blessed and sanctified the seventh day," thus, "he 
pronounced a blessing upon it, — he commended it, — because 
(this is agreeable to the whole anthropomorphitic cast of 
the passage) it was for him a day of leisure after six days 
of toil. 'And he sanctified it.' How? By making it a 
holy institution ? This is the gloss put upon the word by 
force of an opinion derived from some subsequent texts, but 
the word itself implies no such thing. It signifies merely 
'to set apart,' 'to sequester,' to some distinctive use, just as 
we might speak of dedicating or devoting a day to amuse- 
ment, to leisure, to study.* And I submit with confidence, 
that, if we were not biassed to a peculiar interpretation of 
this text by views preconceived from other sources, we 
should not think of regarding it as speaking of the appoint- 
ment, at any time, or in any way, of a religious institution 
for man. We should understand it but as declaring, either 
that God (for himself, and not for man,) made the last day 
of the first week (for the time being, and not for future time,) 
happy and sacred, peculiar, distinct from the days which 
had preceded, by resting upon it ; or that he called that day 
a blessed and a holy, distinguished day, on which he thus 
found repose from labor." p. 189, 190. 

According to the author, then, the meaning of the words, 
" God blessed the seventh day," is simply this, ' God com- 
mended the seventh day of the first week.' This is very in- 

* "We should perhaps hardly speak of consecrating a day to any but 
a religious use. But the French freely use their corresponding word 
with all the latitude which we give to ' dedicate,' and ' devote.' 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 153 

telligible. A day may be commended, praised, pronounced 
blessed, because it is in use or has been used as a period of 
rest. But what meaning does he attach to the phrase, 
" sanctified it ?" In reality, none at all beyond what is im- 
plied in the term " blessed." " He made it happy and sa- 
cred, or he called it blessed and holy, by resting upon it ;" 
that is, the resting of God is itself the consecration. He 
does indeed say that the word signifies, " to set apart, de- 
vote." But such " sequestration, distinctive use," implies 
some object, which, according to the author's view, can be 
none other than the " rest" which " God himself enjoyed." 
How, then, does such a sense of the phrase accord with 
what follows ? ' God pronounced a blessing upon the seventh 
day, and set it apart for his own rest, because that in it he 
rested from all his work.' Thus the fact stated is made to 
appear as a reason for itself! 

The text declares in language sufficiently perspicuous, 
not that God's resting on that individual day is identical 
with the blessing and setting apart of it, but that he blessed 
and set it apart because he had rested on it ; and this setting 
of it apart for the specified reason must have been for some 
object other than the reason itself. 

What this object was, is quite clear from other texts, 
which have plainly a retrospective reference to this in Gene- 
sis : " In six days the Lord made heaven and earth, &c, and 
rested the seventh day, wherefore the Lord blessed the 
seventh day and hallowed it," (that is, sanctified it ; for both 
the verbs are the same as those used in Genesis.) Ex. xx. 
11. "Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sab- 
bath, &c. ; it is a sign between me and the children of Israel 
forever ; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth." 
Ex. xxxi. 16, 17. 

Dr. Palfrey would remove the difficulty which these pas- 
sages and the one under consideration present to his view, 
20 



154 NOTES TO GENESIS. [parti. 

in a very summary way. The old theory of anticipation, he 
very properly does not seem to regard as worthy of notice. 
But the knot that cannot be untied, must be cut. He main- 
tains that both these texts are spurious, and advances his 
interpretation of the one in Genesis, " supposing the latter 
half of the second verse and the third to be genuine," plainly 
enough intimating his suspicion that they are not. As his 
course of argument tends, in my opinion, to unsettle our 
confidence in the genuineness of such passages in the Pen- 
tateuch as may seem to us inconsistent with others, or may 
be irreconcileable with our own views, I must beg the read- 
er's indulgence while I endeavor briefly to examine it. In 
order to enable him to judge for himself, and to give at the 
same time a full representation of the author's reasoning, 
I shall extract the whole argument. 

" I would ask whether any one can compare this verse 
(Ex. xx. 11,) carefully with its parallel in Deuteronomy, and 
then be confident in the opinion that it did make an original 
part of the decalogue. In Deuteronomy (v. 15,) we find no 
such words, but instead of them the following, which accord 
entirely with the view of the institution first given above : 
'And remember that thou wert a servant in the land of 
Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence 
with a mighty hand, and by a stretched-out arm ; therefore 
the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath- 
day.' 

" Will it be said, that one of these texts cannot be used to 
invalidate the other, inasmuch as the reason given in Exo- 
dus, and that in Deuteronomy, were both good, and not mu- 
tually inconsistent, reasons for the institution ; that they were 
both accordingly announced on Sinai ; and that in Exodus 
the mention of only one was preferred, in Deuteronomy only 
of the other? I apprehend that, under the circumstances, 
this view is altogether untenable. What the writer of the 



i 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 155 

Pentateuch is doing in both these instances, is not prescri- 
bing an institution, and assigning reasons for it. In that 
case he might, no doubt, with perfect propriety, select, from 
among good reasons, one to be urged at one time, and 
another at another time. But what he has undertaken to 
do, is to relate to us a fact ; to tell us what God declared, 
by a supernatural voice, at a certain place and time ; and 
those too, I may add, a place and time when every word 
was to be chosen, to make the most effectual impression. 
Under these circumstances, can it be maintained that Mo- 
ses, designing to act the part of a veracious narrator, in ac- 
quainting us with specific words which God spake* could 
give important words in one place, then omit them in 
another, where he is relating the same occurrence, and give 
us other important words, significant of a quite different 
cause of a material provision of his law, in their stead ? 

" I have said, that Moses undertakes, in these two texts, if 
he wrote both, to apprize us of words which God spake* in the 
people's hearing ; and yet they differ from each other. But 
we are told still more respecting the specific character of 
the words in question. God ' wrote them,' it is said, (that 
is, wrote the words recited in the context,) ' in two tables of 
stone.' Deut. v. 22. If he wrote the precise words recorded 
in Deuteronomy as the decalogue — those words, and no 
other, (and under the circumstances it seems unavoidable to 
interpret with all this precision,) — then the decalogue did 
not contain the words attached in Exodus to the fourth com- 
mandment, in which that precept is said to be founded on 
the event of God's creation of the world. And, as if to 
preclude all doubt upon the point, it is even declared, in the 
passage last quoted, that no other words were used than the 
words which it specifies. * These words the Lord spake — 

* The use of the italics is the author's. 



156 NOTES TO GENESIS. [parti. 

and he added no more ; and he wrote them in two tables of 
stone/ 

" If, then, under the circumstances, the essential character 
of an exact narrative precludes the supposition of both these 
passages having been written by Moses, which is to be re- 
garded as having proceeded from his hand ? Certainly no 
reasons appear why the authenticity of that in Exodus 
should be asserted to the prejudice of the other ; and if the 
question had to be left altogether in suspense, I apprehend 
that the remarks which have been made would show it to 
be altogether unsafe to argue, from the passage in Exodus, 
that the sabbatical institution was contemporaneous with the 
creation of the world. But further; in comparing the claims 
of the two passages to be considered authentic, one to the 
exclusion of the other, we cannot lose sight of the fact, that 
the passage in Deuteronomy presents the same view of the 
sabbath with that exhibited so fully in the texts quoted 
above : a circumstance which affords strong presumption of 
its superior authority. 

" These views, I think, dispose one strongly to the conclu- 
sion, that the verse of Exodus in question was not written 
by Moses, but by some later hand. Nothing could be more 
natural than for some possessor of his writings, struck by an 
apparent coincidence between the command, to keep the 
Jewish sabbath, as inserted in the decalogue, and God's re- 
posing on the seventh day, as related at the beginning of 
Genesis, to have recorded his remark as a gloss in the mar- 
gin of his book, whence, as is known to have been the case 
with some of the most important interpolations of the Bible, 
it subsequently found its way into the body of the page. 
And I will not disguise my opinion, that the history of the 
text in Deuteronomy was probably the same, though it pre- 
sents what I believe to be the true view of the sabbath. I 
have argued that both texts could not be genuine. I think 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 157 

it most likely that neither is so ; and my chief reason for this 
persuasion is, that, supposing the genuineness of either, it 
presents a fragment differing in its tone and structure from 
all the rest of the decalogue, since the decalogue, in every 
other case, studying the utmost brevity, deals only in laws 
and their sanctions, without exhibiting the reasons on which 
they were founded: a topic which seems foreign to its 
purpose. 

" And the same view, I think, is to be taken, perhaps with 
even greater confidence, of the only other important text 
bearing upon this point, Ex. xxxi. 17. I will not say that 
this text is rendered suspicious by the abrupt change of per- 
sons which it exhibits, indicating the second clause' to be but 
a gloss, though certainly its structure is strikingly consistent 
with that view. But, if I mistake not, the second clause 
which is all that concerns us in this inquiry, is a palpable 
contradiction to the first, such as strongly to discredit the 
supposition that Moses was its writer. ' The children of 
Israel,' it is said, ' shall keep the sabbath, to observe the 
sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual cove- 
nant ; it is a sign between me and the children of Israel for- 
ever.' And why were the children of Israel to observe this 
sign, which was a token of their covenant with God? 'For,' 
the text goes on, ' in six days the Lord made heaven and 
earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed,' 
{took breath.) That is, for a sign between me and them- 
selves, they are to keep a day, in which all the world, 
as much as themselves, has an interest. I can scarcely en- 
tertain a doubt that the last clause of the verse in question 
was, in the first instance, a note upon the passage to which 
we now find it attached, suggested by the reading of the 
related passage in the second chapter of Genesis. 

" I have thus submitted what seems to me good reason for 
believing that neither of the two texts, quoted from the law 



158 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

to prove the ante-Mosaic origin of the sabbatical institution, 
originally made part of that document, and for adhering ac- 
cordingly to the conclusion, that the Jewish sabbath was 
simply a Jewish festival. The course which I take might 
be more questionable, were it not precisely the same, which 
reasons of the case, — scarcely, I think, more urgent than 
those which have application here, — compel us to take with 
respect to several texts, for which the mere external evi- 
dence is as complete as it is for any part of the Pentateuch, 
but which, notwithstanding, no one can deny to be spurious, 
provided he is of opinion that Moses wrote the book which 
contains them. There is no other alternative. We must 
either refer the whole Pentateuch to a later age, or we must 
allow that, after Moses had composed that volume, it shared, 
in some degree, the lot of other books, and received occa- 
sional interpolations, originating often in marginal comments. 
Believing that we have sufficient proof of Moses having 
written the books, we accordingly adopt that theory, along 
with its necessary incident of the spuriousness of certain 
parts ; and this we do the more readily, because often a little 
observation shows us that these parts are of a parenthetical 
character, not breaking by their removal the continuity of 
the sense, and so presenting precisely the appearance which 
glosses of foreign origin would naturally wear." pp. 190-195. 
Preparatory to a review of the Professor's arguments, I 
would also ask, whether any one can compare those three 
texts, and not perceive and feel that they exactly harmonize 
with each other, and also with the opinion of a paradisaical 
origin of the sabbath as a day of holy rest and worship. 
If spurious, then, the probability is exceedingly strong, that 
they were introduced with the view of supporting this 
opinion ; which, consequently, must have been pretty gene- 
rally admitted in the time of their author. This, of course, 
will carry up the opinion itself to a very early period ; if it 



chap. I— ii. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 159 

be allowed that the Samaritan Pentateuch descended from 
copies existing among the ten tribes before the Assyrian 
captivity, or even the Babylonian, to a period when the 
Hebrew nation nourished in its greatness. And we may 
reasonably ask, whence such an opinion originated, if it be 
unfounded in scripture, as it must be if these texts are 
spurious. To the great deliverance from Egypt, the glo- 
rious independence of the people, the only fact which the 
sabbath was instituted to commemorate, — why should the 
Hebrews append a reference to the period of time employed 
by God in the formation of the world, and to the day of 
rest immediately subsequent, thus calling off the national 
mind from the single purpose intended, to another altogether 
different ? All embarrassment on this point is removed by 
admitting the commonly received opinion. 

I am willing to allow that the text of the New Testament 
is supported on external grounds, much more susceptible of 
careful observation and determinate settlement than that of 
the Old. This will probably be granted by all who are 
acquainted with the data on which each is maintained to be 
generally correct. In the language of the author, an in- 
terpolation may exist- in the Pentateuch "for which the 
external evidence is as complete as it is for any part of it. 
We must allow that it shared in some degree the lot of other 
books, and received occasional interpolations." But then, 
in every such case, satisfactory reasons for supposing inter- 
polation must be given ; and here Dr. Palfrey has failed in 
the case under consideration. 

The whole ground on which he maintains the spurious- 
ness of the three texts, is their alleged inconsistency with 
Deut. v. 15, and the representations so often made of 
the sabbath as a day of rest.* Unless he has substantiated 
his allegation, their genuineness remains unaffected. 

* On the same ground, Gabler, in Ids Versuche iiber the Schop- 



160 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

The view commonly taken of the two texts in Exodus 
and Deuteronomy, that each assigns a separate reason for 
observing the sabbath not exclusive of the other,* is con- 
sidered by the author as " untenable. The writer is not 
assigning reasons for an institution, but acquainting us with 
specific words which God spake" He particularly insists 
upon this point. " Moses undertakes to apprize us of words 
which God spake in the people's hearing ;" and he " wrote 
them, that is, the words recited — the precise words re- 
corded — those words, and no other. These words the Lord 
spake — and he added no more." 

But I appeal to any candid and liberal interpreter to say, 
whether such an assumption is not unreasonable and con- 
trary to the general use of scriptural language. When we 
read, that ' the word of the Lord came to a prophet, say- 
ing,' or, ' the Lord said unto a prophet,' does any one sup- 
pose that the language following such an introduction are 
the identical words in which the communication was 
audibly conveyed to the prophet's ear 1 To refute such an 
extravagant notion in the present day would be to waste 
the time and patience of the reader. And I apprehend that 
few would be more willing than the Professor himself to 
dispense with argument on such a point. And yet, I can- 
not see any essential difference between this case and that 
of giving the decalogue. In the latter the circumstances of 



fungsgeschichte, p. 63, rejects Ex. xx. 8 ss. and xxxi. 12 — 17, because 
in Deut. v. 12 — 16, Moses mentions another design of the sabbath. 
See Jahn's Introduction, p. 215, (note b) ; or his Einleitung in die 
Gottlichen Biicher des Alten Bundes, Theil II. p. 136. 

* Maimonides has stated these two reasons with remarkable distinct- 
ness and propriety. They may be found in his Moreh Nevochim, 
Part II. chap. 31, p. 46, Berlin edition, 283, Buxtorf's Transla- 
tion. Patrick, in his note on Ex. xx. 11, has placed his remarks 
within the reach of the English reader. 



chap. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 161 

solemnity, of terror, of sublimity, and consequently of im- 
pression, are undoubtedly greater. The publicity of the 
audible communication is also a peculiar and an important 
circumstance. Still, it remains to be proved, that the author 
of the Pentateuch intended to deliver the very words in 
which the ten commandments were embodied. If he have 
clothed them in terms best fitted to express the laws in- 
tended to be promulged, he might employ the language 
which he has used, in evident consistency with the ordinary 
phraseology of scripture, even if the words had been se- 
lected by himself. Certain language, certain words, are 
constantly said to be used, when the meaning evidently is, 
that the sentiments which they express are avowed or 
cherished. See, among a multitude of illustrations, Deut. 
xxxiii. 9, Isa. xxviii. 15. The terms * word' and ' thing' are 
often equivalent, and used in our translation to denote the 
same Hebrew expression I^H. We have an illustration of 
this in Ex. xxxv. 1,4:" These are the words d^^Jl ;" and, 
" this is the thing "l^ntt." The former of these texts, 
together with the two verses immediately following, is so 
strikingly applicable to the point in question, that I must be 
allowed to quote them in full. " These are the words which 
the Lord hath commanded, that ye should do them. Six 
days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall 
be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the Lord : who- 
soever doeth work therein shall be put to death. Ye shall 
kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the sabbath 
day." On the ground which Dr. Palfrey assumes, the pro- 
hibition of a fire on the sabbath must also have been audi- 
bly enunciated by God himself; or rather, this text also must 
be stricken out of the Pentateuch, because it contains matter 
additional to the very words supposed to have been uttered, 
of which it is " even declared, as if to preclude all doubt 
upon the point," (says the author,) " and he added no more." 
21 



162 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

If we maintain that the language in which the decalogue is 
contained in Deuteronomy is the very words in which it 
was uttered on Sinai, then most certainly the language in 
Exodus (chap, xx.) cannot be the very words, for they 
differ in several particulars from the former, as any one 
may see who will take the trouble to compare them. And 
were it really necessary " to interpret with all this precis- 
ion," I submit whether we should not rather suppose the 
chapter in Exodus to contain the identical words, because it 
is the history of the giving of the law, of the very original 
publication of it, whereas that in Deuteronomy is only the 
re-statement of the fact made by Moses to the Israelites long 
after it occurred. 

Here, in passing, I may be allowed to express my firm 
persuasion, that not a few able commentators have per- 
plexed themselves with difficulties leading to forced con- 
structions of texts in themselves sufficiently plain, on the 
supposition that verbal harmony was to be expected, where 
the sacred writers intended simply to express the same 
thought, or to make the same general representation. A 
comparison of 2 Sam. vii. with 1 Chron. xvii, xxviii. 3 — 7, 
will afford an illustration to any one who is tolerably well 
acquainted with commentaries. 

Thus far I have considered the point in question in refer- 
ence to the ordinary scriptural use of language. But I 
ought not to omit the fact particularly important in this 
case, that the very term rendered words is actually the one 
employed by the divine historian to express the command- 
ments themselves. Thus, in Ex. xxxiv. 29, we have for "the 
ten commandments," d^!n^ frltp? ; and so in Deut. iv. 
13, and x. 4, in both which places these same "ten com- 
mandments" or ' words,' iD'Hi*]' are said to ^ ave ^ een 
written on the " two tables of stone." And it is especially 
worthy of notice, that in the very verse on the latter clause 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS, 163 

of which Dr. Palfrey lays such stress (Deut. v. 22, in the 
Heb. 19,) the very same term occurs in the very same 
sense. " These words (commandments, Q^!inil>) tne Lord 
spake unto all your assembly, &c." Of course, when Moses 
says : " and he added no more ; and he wrote them in two 
tables of stone," he means to teach us, that the ten previously 
recited commandments constitute the whole of the law 
which was in that manner preserved. Whether one series 
of terms is employed in exhibiting them or another, is there- 
fore of little or no consequence. 

But although Dr. Palfrey has argued against the text in 
Exodus from that in Deuteronomy, his persuasion is that 
neither is genuine, because " the decalogue in every other 
case, studying the utmost brevity, deals only in laws and 
their sanctions," while this "exhibits the reasons on which the 
law was founded, a topic which seems foreign to its purpose." 

If, indeed, the external evidence were of such a kind as to 
throw suspicion on the genuineness of the text, the Pro- 
fessor's argument might be allowed a place : although, even 
in that case, I think the importance to be attached to it 
would be very inconsiderable. The circumstances of the 
Israelites may have been such as to afford sufficient cause 
for giving the reasons of this particular law. Their long 
residence in Egypt may have weakened both their regard 
for the sabbatical institution, and their knowledge of the 
grounds on which it was established ; and it may have been 
highly expedient to impress these considerations on their 
minds. And the positive nature of the law, in contradis- 
tinction to the moral character of all the others, may have 
added another motive leading to the introduction of reasons 
in this particular case. Besides, the lawgiver is not so 
studious of brevity as he is represented to be. The second 
commandment goes very much into detail, in the represen* 
tation both of the law and its sanction. Neither can we 



164 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

argue from any peculiarity in the manner of representing a 
law. Several contain merely the words of the statute ; 
others exhibit, in more or less length, the sanctions ; to the 
fifth alone, a direct and positive promise is added ; and in 
the fourth, a reason for the institution which it prescribes. 
The author's " persuasion" is therefore not warranted by the 
grounds alleged. 

The latter clause of Ex. xxxi. 17, is considered as spuri- 
ous, because it " is a palpable contradiction to the first." 
But this assertion rests on very inadequate proof. The ar- 
gument alleged is, that the observance of an institution in- 
tended as a sign of covenant relation between God and the 
Israelites, could not be required on the ground stated, which 
would equally well apply to all mankind. It is a sufficient 
answer to this objection, that the sabbath was revived among 
the Israelites after its observance had been partly lost, and 
then it was made a sign. Thus also circumcision was 
enjoined on Abraham's whole family, and yet, when the 
covenant relation became limited to the Israelites, it became 
a sign between God and them. Any institution divinely 
established by Moses might have been constituted a sign 
between God and his people, even if it had been observed 
in earlier patriarchal times. Its prior establishment and 
more general use are quite consistent with its re-establish- 
ment with this distinctive object in view. That part of the 
verse of the spuriousness of which Dr. Palfrey " scarcely 
entertains a doubt," gives a general reason for the sabbati- 
cal institution ; the other states its particular intent in refer- 
ence to the Israelites. Surely nothing like palpable contra- 
diction can be proved. 

The Mosaic account of the creation has been supposed to 
be contradicted by geological investigations, demonstrating 
that long periods of time must have been required for the 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 165 

lives of those successions of animal and vegetable substan- 
ces, and for those mineral productions, the existence of 
which is proved by organic and fossil remains still in being; 
and also for other phenomena, which an examination of the 
structure of the earth exhibits. But, on the other hand, 
some of the best geologists maintain, that the present state 
of the science proves the facts which have been discovered 
to be in harmony with the scriptural account properly un- 
derstood. Various views of this account have had their 
respective advocates. A clear and comprehensive exhibi- 
tion of these views may be seen, in an article on " The Con- 
nexion between Geology and the Mosaic History of the 
Creation, by Edward Hitchcock, Professor of Chemistry 
and Natural History in Amherst College," published in the 
Biblical Repository and Quarterly Observer for October, 
1835.* Of these various views, two may be regarded 
as most entitled to respect. The one supposes the first 
verse to relate the original creation of the material which 
formed the substance of the world, and the remainder to be 
a history of its arranged and orderly construction, at some 
subsequent period, leaving sufficient time between the two 
for the production of the various phenomena. The other 
connects the first verse with the following in order of time, 
and interprets the days of distinct periods, sufficiently long 
to admit of the geological facts being explained. If the 
phrase. " the evening and the morning," which occurs so 
often in this narrative, be interpreted literally, (and this is in 
accordance with the narrative in general, and indeed with 
the general contents of the whole book of Genesis,) the con- 
clusion is irresistible, that it designates the period of one 
revolution of the earth on its axis ; the time ordinarily un- 
derstood by the phrase ' day and night,' vir^%s£ov. It is 

* This instructive paper did not come under my notice until some 
time after I had written the above analysis and notes. 



166 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

the opinion of several scientific men, and of some commen- 
tators, that the term 'day' is " equivalent to a period of 
undefined extent," and that, thus, the sacred writer speaks of 
" six indefinite days or periods made up of an equally in- 
definite number of common or twenty-four-hour days." 
This view is defended by Professor Bush in his note on 
Gen. i. 5, and is given in his language. But it is incapable 
of support, if the narrative be literal. True it is that the 
term ' day,' in Hebrew as in other languages, is often used 
for a period of time of undefined or unknown extent, and so 
is also the term ' hour ;' as in the phrases " the day that the 
Lord God made, &c." " the day that I brought you out of 
the land of Egypt." " the day of the Lord cometh, &c," 
" the hour cometh, &c. ;" and in common parlance we say, 
" such an one has had his day,' ' his day is past.' But the 
succession of days here mentioned to the seventh as much 
precludes any such supposition in this case, and obliges us, 
if we adhere to a literal sense, to comprehend the whole in 
one week, as would the consecutive notice of hours, from 
one to twelve, oblige us to understand the aggregate as 
denoting one popular day. It is said that " the true import 
of the numeral ITlXl one, seems in several instances to be 
that of certain, peculiar, special, Lat. quidam" This adjunct 
sense to its ordinary numeral meaning may perhaps be oc- 
casionally admitted, but very seldom, and never unless clearly 
intimated by the context or nature of the subject. The use 
of the cardinal one for the ordinal first in v. 5, may be ex- 
plained by supposing that the historian, after mentioning the 
formation of light, its separation from darkness, and the 
name by which each was denoted, proceeds to say, that 
God having advanced so far in the act of creation, " the 
evening and the morning were "& E"P day one" Rec- 
koning afterwards from this one day inclusive, he uses the 
ordinals second, third, &c. Comp. Tit. iii. 10, ^rd pica 



chap. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 167 

xoli fours'^av, after one and the second. This method of ex- 
planation is not indeed necessary, as the cardinal one is 
several times used for the ordinal first, of which it may be 
sufficient to give an instance from Gen. viii. 5. "tinPO ^in^lZl 
on the first (lit. one) of the month." The learned commen- 
tator referred to endeavors to maintain his position by 
quoting "Dan. viii. 13, [3]: there stood before me a ram, 
Heb. ^injfc b^, a certain ram, that is, a ram of a peculiar 
description, one having two horns of unequal height." But 
it is too plain to require proof, that the peculiarity of this 
ram is not denoted by the' term Im^, which is very pro- 
perly rendered a, by a usage not at all uncommon ; its pe- 
culiar characteristic is afterwards expressly stated. The next 
passage cited is also by no means satisfactory. " Ezek. vii. 5: 
1 an evil, an only evil, behold, is come.' Heb. t\T\\k 513H 
one evil, that is, an evil of a unique and unwonted nature." 
But the peculiarity of the evil is shown rather from the repe- 
tition of the word which expresses it, W*T, than from the use of 
IH^. The literal translation of the Hebrew is, ' an evil, 
evil, fUH t\H& n!?*}) behold, is come.' A similar repe- 
tition occurs in the next verse : " an end is come, the end 
is come," (f J2H &^ fc*S ^p.), and this is dwelt upon at the 
end of the verse : " behold, it is come," and in the seventh : 
" the morning is come — the time is come." If the numeral 
be intended to intimate the extraordinary character of the 
evil, doubtless the repetition is much better adapted to make 
the intended impression. The next passage appealed to, is 
Cant. vi. 9. But it is by no means certain that the numeral 
is intended to represent the bride in any other light than that 
of her mother's only daughter. The Hebrew literally ren- 
dered is as follows : ' one is she, my dove, my perfect, one 
is she of her mother ;' then, as might naturally be supposed 
of an only daughter, ' the choice, (the darling,) is she of her 



168 NOTES TO GENESIS. [parti. 

that bare her.' It cannot be denied, however, that what is 
said in vim 8, may be a valid objection to this view ; but the 
want of sufficient data to prove the " little" one there intro- 
duced to have been sister of the bride eulogized in vi. 9, 
renders the objection uncertain, to say the least. But the 
apparent opposition between the " one" all-worthy object of 
the bride-groom's regard, and the multiplicity of " queens, 
concubines, and virgins" mentioned in the preceding verse, 
is in favor of the Professor's opinion. In this passage, there- 
fore, as in Job. xxiii. 13, 1h^ may imply the excellence of 
the party spoken of, which the context expressly asserts. 
Four texts are afterwards referred to. The first is Gen. 
xxxvii. 20, where Joseph's brothers propose to " slay him 
and cast him into some pit ;" literally, one of the pits, 
jTriSL? ^T\^2. ; the second is 1 Kings xix. 4, " under a (tltl$) 
juniper tree;" the third is 1 Kings xx. 13, "there came a 
nn^) P ro P net unto Ahab ;" and the last, Dan. viii. 13, 
" I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said, &c." 
where in both cases the Hebrew is 1H^. Did the Professor 
imagine that the pit, the juniper tree, the prophet, and the 
two saints, were each " peculiar, especially distinguished 
from other" things " of the same classes ?" It is evident 
that these passages prove nothing to the purpose, and the 
reader on examining them is utterly at a loss to perceive 
their bearing on the usage intended to be proved. But if 
the usage could be admitted and applied to Gen. i. 5, the 
author's inference that "the evening and the morning con- 
stituted a period of time of indefinite length," would be 
limited to what is called " the first day," unless the argument 
for such usage were rested on the application of the term 
6 day,' as no such usage is pleaded for the other numerals. 

The length of time allotted to each one of the revolutions 
designated by the term ' day,' is not indeed determined. 
Still, it cannot be so far extended as to meet the demands 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 169 

of geological science, while at the same time the authority 
of the inspired historian is supported, without involving con- 
sequences inconsistent with the form and density of the 
earth. If the expression " morning and evening," and the 
term "day," could possibly be explained figuratively, it could 
only be on the supposition that this section of the book ori- 
ginally existed as an independent document, and therefore 
is not necessarily to be subjected in every part to the same 
laws of interpretation as are to be applied to the Pentateuch 
in general. Such an explanation assumes that the account 
is allegorical in respect to the designation of time, but in 
other respects historical. But if it were an independent 
document, written by some very ancient patriarch, the fact 
of its being incorporated into the Pentateuch by Moses, will 
perhaps be considered as making the assumption of partial 
allegory forced and unnatural. This would seem to be 
reasonable, but it is not a necessary inference ; for Moses 
may have incorporated it in his work without the least 
alteration, just as his venerated ancestor had transmitted the 
precious document. The Pentateuch itself, as well as other 
historical books of the Old Testament, affords evidence of 
this remarkable carefulness of the sacred writers to deliver 
to posterity the productions of those inspired men who had 
preceded them, uncorrupted and unaltered, even at the risk 
of diminishing that uniformity which might at first be ex- 
pected to reign in one regularly continued work. Still, it is 
evident that all subsequent sacred writers, who take notice 
of the creation as a work of six days, do invariably assume 
a literal and not an allegorical sense of the word ' day.' 
The other solution of the difficulty may therefore be re- 
garded as the more probable of the two. The first verse 
may, and most probably does, express the original creation 
of the mass of matter, and the following represent its con- 
dition and subsequent formation. The connexion of the two 
22 



170 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

accounts in the narrative by no means requires a chronolo- 
gical connexion of the things narrated. The language dees 
undoubtedly allow such an exposition, and the geological 
facts which are thought to support it are merely the occasion 
which has led to its adoption. In other words, science has 
suggested a rule of interpretation, and conducted the inquirer 
to a deeper investigation of the meaning of scripture. 

If the version of Rashi, given in the third note, be allowed 
to be correct, it will harmonize with this solution. The only 
point of difference will be this : the one assumes, while the 
other asserts, a previous creation of the mass of matter of 
which the world was formed. Both agree in this, that the 
substance existed when the creation or formation described 
in the chapter took place, without saying any thing of the 
time during which it had existed in its unformed state. 

Since the preparation of these notes, Dr. John Pye Smith 
has published his work " On the Relation between the Holy 
Scriptures and Some Parts of Geological Science." In one 
part of his book, the learned author proposes to give such a 
view of the records in Genesis as shall be consistent with 
facts as developed and ascertained by geology, and some 
other departments of physical science. Whether these facts 
may not be reasonably explained without resorting to such 
expositions of scripture as he maintains, I leave to the de- 
cision of those, who, by uniting a competent acquaintance 
with physical science to an equally competent knowledge 
of biblical interpretation, are best qualified to judge. I may 
be allowed to say, however, that the language of scripture 
does not appear to me to require the representations which 
this author has founded on it. The reader's attention is re- 
quested to the following extract. 

" The Hebrew word 7^*1 is commonly translated firma- 
ment, after the example of the Septuagint, {dr^i^a,) but many 
modern critics have sought to mollify the unphilosophical 



CHAP. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 171 

idea of a solid concave shell over our head, by using the 
word expanse. No doubt they felt their minds acquiescing 
in this term as expressing very well the diffused fluid which 
surrounds the earth ; and so leaving us at liberty to conceive 
of its increasing tenuity, till it is lost in the planetary spaces. 
But this is the transferring of a modern idea to times and 
persons which had it not. The word strictly signifies a 
solid substance, extended by beating out, or rolling, or any 
other mode of working upon a ductile mass.* The old 
word, firmament, was therefore the most proper. Ex- 
amining the whole subject by connecting it with some pas- 
sages which have been quoted, and some yet to be mentioned, 
we acquire an idea of the meteorology of the Hebrews. 
They supposed that, at a moderate distance above the 
flight of birds, was a solid concave hemisphere, a kind of 
dome, transparent, in which the stars were fixed, as lamps ; 
and containing openings, to be used or closed as was ne- 
cessary. It was understood as supporting a kind of celes- 
tial ocean, called * the waters above the firmament,' and 
* the waters above the heavens.' ' This was the grand re- 
servoir containing water to be discharged at proper times 
in rain, with which were connected ' water-courses, for the 
overflowing' or pouring out.\ The idea also was enter- 
tained of masses of water being secured in strong bags, 
which the clouds were supposed to be. 

Thus we read, as one of the works of the Deity, that he 
'tieth up water in his dark cloud, and the cloud beneath them 
is not torn.' J Here also were the ' treasures of snow, and 
treasures of hail. '§ Lightning also was conceived of as pro- 
duced, and then laid by for use, in the same region : and as 
consisting of some kind of ignited matter, called in scripture 
' coals of fire ;' deriving the idea from burning wood, for 

* See Jer. x. 9. f Job xxxviii. 25. J lb. xxvi. 8. § lb. xxxviii. 22. 



172 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part I. 

mineral coal they knew not. Of the nature and cause of 
thunder, the Israelites had no conception ; and therefore 
they referred it immediately to the supreme cause, and 
called it ' the voice of God.' This idea coincided with the 
accustomed mode of representing the Deity, by the analo- 
gies of the human form." p. 222, 223. 

It is not to be doubted, that the Hebrews, in common 
with other nations of antiquity, were unacquainted with the 
true theory of physical nature. But it must not be forgotten, 
that, in common with all nations, they employ popular lan- 
guage, and speak of things as they appear rather than as 
they are. We do it ourselves in some degree, and doubtless 
they did it in a much greater. This simple principle does 
of itself suggest the proper exposition of many passages, 
and the poetic imagery of the sacred writers will solve any 
further difficulty which others may be supposed to in- 
volve. 

If the notion which Dr. Smith has adopted from some 
older writers respecting the Hebrew idea of " a solid con- 
cave hemisphere, &c." had any good foundation in the texts 
alluded to, it would just as logically follow, that the earth 
was thought to be supported on " pillars," from such texts 
as Job ix. 6, xxvi. 11. Ps. lxxv. 3. The idea of water- 
courses connected with the supposed celestial ocean, and the 
strong bags identical with the clouds, is about as well sup- 
ported as that of literal " windows in heaven," and literal 
" bags," with which the Christian is commanded to provide 
himself. See Gen. vii. 11, Luke xii. 33. The author might 
as well have inferred that the Hebrew supposed these rain- 
bags to be " tied up" with twine or some flexible material. 
It is extraordinary that he should not have seen and felt at 
once that all this sort of language, as well as the rest which 
he has cited, is merely poetic, particularly as he proceeds to 
quote a passage from the eighteenth Psalm, v. 7 — 15, in 



CHAP. I— ii. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 173 

which, as he observes very truly, " we find all the parts of 
this imagery combined, so as to produce the most magnifi- 
cent effect." What he says of lightning being " conceived 
of as produced, and then laid by for use" in some region, is 
utterly unfounded. Indeed, a rigid, literal interpretation of 
certain texts on which the general view avowed by him is 
maintained, is inconsistent with other representations. That 
the Hebrews did not consider the heavenly bodies as fix- 
tures, hanging like lamps from a kind of dome, is plain from 
Job ix. 9, xxxviii. 31, Amos. v. 8, Judg. v. 20, and other 
places ; and certainly the author of the book of Genesis, in 
saying that " a mist went up from the earth, and watered 
the whole face of the ground," (ii. 6,) must have had the 
idea that it came down again in the form of rain. 

Dr. Smith gives his view of the Mosaic account of the 
creation, p. 227 ss. He acknowledges (p. 232,) that the 
word earth, " when it is conjoined with * the heavens,' de- 
notes the entire created world," but immediately adds, " it 
is evident of itself that the practical understanding of the 
phrase would be in conformity with the ideas of the people 
who used it," which is no doubt true. Then, as if to limit 
still further the application of its sense in the first chapter in 
general, and in the recapitulation in the first verse of the 
second, he remarks that the word is often used in a limited 
sense, which is certainly the case in the Hebrew, and, I 
presume, in all other languages. He then states his opinion, 
that " subsequently to the first verse" of the first chapter, " and 
throughout the whole description of the six days, the word 
was designed to express the pari of our world which God 
was adapting for the dwelling of man and the animals con- 
nected with him.* I must profess my conviction that we 
are not obliged, by the terms made use of, to extend the nar- 

* Here and elsewhere the italics are the author's. 



174 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART L. 

rative of the six days to a wider application than this ; a 
description, in expressions adapted to the ideas and capacities 
of mankind in the earliest ages, of a series of operations, by 
which the Being of omnipotent wisdom and goodness adjusted 
and furnished the earth generally, but, as the particular 
subject under consideration here, a portion of its surface 
for most glorious purposes ; in which a newly-formed crea- 
ture should be the object of those manifestations of the au- 
thority and grace of the Most High, which shall to eternity 
show forth his perfections above all other methods of their 
display. This portion of the earth I conceive to have been 
a large part of Asia, lying between the Caucassian ridge, the 
Caspian Sea, and Tartary, on the north, the Persian and 
Indian Seas on the south, and the high mountain ridges 
which run, at considerable distances, on the eastern and the 
western flank." 

I am compelled to say, that after repeatedly reading this 
statement, I am at a loss to reconcile its different parts. 
When the writer speaks of " adjusting and furnishing the 
earth generally," one would naturally suppose that he in- 
tended to denote either the whole or a large proportion of 
our globe ; but this would be at variance with the words 
which precede and those immediately following, which limit 
this operation to " a part of our world, a portion of the 
earth's surface," which portion he proceeds to define with 
geographical distinctness. Neither can I understand him to 
mean, that the Mosaic narrative relates in general to the 
formation of the whole earth, and particularly to that of 
this portion. He supposes the previously existing " con- 
dition of superficial ruin, or some kind of general dis- 
order, to have been produced by the subsidence of the re- 
gion." Of course, then, the ruinous disorder would be 
limited to the portion in question, and the remainder of the 
earth's surface would need no such adjustment and re-for- 
mation. 



chap. I— II. 3.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 175 

Such a restricted sense of the term ' earth,' when used in 
connexion with ' heavens,' is quite inadmissible ; and I can- 
not but think, that the true principle whereon to explain the 
narrative in this chapter, is that which has been already- 
suggested, namely, that the formation and arrangement of 
things are represented to have been as they would have 
appeared to a supposed human observer stationed on the 
earth, and so whenever this narrative is referred to in other 
parts of scriptnre. 



Part II. Chap. ii. 4 — iv. 26. 

(13.) The former half of this fourth verse is the title to 
what follows. Drechsler, indeed, p. 78, supposes it to refer 
to the preceding account as well as to the subsequent ; and 
doubtless, in writing it, the author had in view the narrative 
before related. But it is a proper title to the account immedi- 
ately afterwards given, as is also the case in vi. 9, and xi. 27. 
Hll bliTI, which properly means some accounts of the origin 
of, and, hence, generations, descents, or genealogical notices, is 
sometimes used in the sense of history. See xxxvii. 1. The 
connexion of the two last is evident, as, in all probability, the 
earliest historical accounts were nothing more than genealo- 
gical lists, with brief notices of prominent individuals. The 
clause may be translated thus : ' this is an account of the hea- 
vens and the earth when they were created.' The account 
begins with the next words, which are intimately connected 
with the fifth verse, as follows : ' When the Lord God made 
the earth and the heavens, then any shrub of the field was 
not yet in the ground, and any grass of the field had not 
yet sprouted forth ; for the Lord God had not caused it to 
rain, &c.' This describes the state of things during the 
time that the process of creation was going on, and the 
brevity of the account must be supplied from the preceding 



176 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part n. 

narrative, and from the description of the germination and 
production of vegetables, according to the ordinary course 
of nature, which immediately follows. In the first chapter, 
Moses had mentioned the formation of plants on the third 
day. Now, proceeding to the most ancient history of the 
earth and of man, he explains in what manner plants were 
afterwards propagated, and introduces his account by re- 
marking, that they did not originally exist in the dry land, 
(i. 9, 10.) The -j commencing the sixth verse is adversative, 
and should be rendered but; and that which begins the 
fifth, serves to introduce the latter part of the sentence, and 
ought to be translated then, as it is in hi. 5, ^HpSJl " then your 
eyes shall be opened." The reader cannot fail to observe 
that these two clauses are constructed in the same way, 
each beginning with the word Q"P3, 'in the day : in ii. 4, 

'■m 5^i jd^irn p$ ta^ribg rn'rr; fiito* af^, 'in the 

day of the Lord God's making the earth and the heavens, 
then every, &c"; in iii. 5, t£W ^JJlS? ^?£ Spb^ KVp 
" in the day of your eating of it, then your eyes shall be 
opened." In the former passage, the rabbinical division of 
the sentence is, of course, disregarded. — It is remarked by 
Rashi on this place, that G^ft in scripture always means 
not yet. 

(14.) As I see no intimation in the narrative which would 
lead to the opinion that these trees were allegorical, I adopt 
the literal view, on the ground that this is always to be 
preferred, unless the nature of the subject is such as to re- 
quire a figurative sense. 

Kennicott, in his " Dissertation on the Tree of Life in Para- 
dise," (Oxford, 1747,) has endeavored to prove, that no par- 
ticular tree was intended ; but that the phrase is applicable 
to fruit trees in general, from their natural tendency to 
preserve life. His essay is more ingenious than satisfactory, 



CHAP. II. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS* 177 

and the translation which he gives to ii. 9, in order to make 
it agree with his view, does manifest violence to the He- 
brew. " And out of the ground made the Lord God to 
grow every tree that was pleasant to the sight, and that was 
good for food, and a tree of life ; and in the midst of the 
garden the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." This 
is not only against the Masoretic accentuation, but also 
against the necessary connexion of *} with "p? after 15?!, 
He attempts to vindicate this transfer of "} from its natural 
place in the series of the Words, by appealing to Gen. xxii. 4, 
and xxviii. 6 ; but in both of these cases it precedes a verb 
with which it is intimately connected, and may be rendered 
that. No less forced is his translation, if it may be called a 
translation of iii. 22 : " Behold, the man hath behaved, as if 
he were equal to one of us, as to the, test of good and evil j 
and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take again of the 
trees of life, and eat, and so live on all his days." 

(15.) It is difficult to identify the first two rivers men 
tioned by Moses. Some have imagined that he means the 
Nile and the Ganges or Indus, which, with the other two, 
the Tigris and Euphrates, constitute the four great rivers 
best known to the ancients. But, on this hypothesis, it is 
impossible to make the account consistent either with geo- 
graphical truth, or with that accurate knowledge which the 
Pentateuch exhibits. Indeed, it seems impossible to explain 
how any Hebrew writer could have represented the Nile as 
approximating in its source to the head of either of the 
others. So gross an ignorance is not to be assumed. 
Neither is it reasonable to believe, that Moses intended to 
represent the garden of Eden as a territory of vast extent, 
comprehending the immense region which a line bordering 
on the sources of these rivers must necessarily include. 
Probably the Pison is the Phasis or Phash, which falls into 
23 



178 NOTES TO GENESIS. [PART It 

the Black Sea. The name is said to be derived from the 
fulness and impetuosity of its stream, and consequently (as 
might be supposed,) was not limited in its application to this 
river. Havilah, which this stream is said to wind about, is 
probably Cholchis, famed among the ancients for its gold. 
It is uncertain whether the substance afterwards mentioned 
was a precious gum used as frankincense, or pearls. The 
Gihon, (so called from HP 5, to break forth, and therefore 
applied to various streams, and even to a water-course at 
Jerusalem, 2 Chron. xxxiii. 30,) is perhaps the Aras or 
Araxes, which, rising near the source of the Phasis, pursues 
its south-easterly course to the Caspian. This river is said 
to wind round the country of Cush, rendered in the com- 
mon version Ethiopia. Some identify this region with that 
inhabited by the Cosseei near Media. Others consider it as a 
comprehensive word applied to southern countries, whether 
in Asia or Africa. Traces of it may still be discovered in 
the name Chusistan, a province in Persia. The Hiddekel 
or Tigris, so called from the rapidity of its current, and the 
Phrath or Euphrates, are both well known. If this view of 
the four rivers be correct, the garden of Eden must have 
been situated in Armenia. 

From the tenth verse, it is evident that the four rivers were 
originally connected. The division of the original stream 
may well be attributed to some of the various changes to 
which the surface of the globe has at various times been 
subjected. Still the question arises, does the language de- 
scribe what existed in the time of Moses 1 or does it repre- 
sent the antediluvian condition? No good reason can be 
assigned, why the geographical position of Eden should be 
marked out by topographical phenomena existing before the 
flood, by a writer posterior to that event. The probability, 
then, is in favor of the opinion, that Moses describes the lo- 
cality by marks which admitted of application in his day,> 



CHAP. II. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 179 

If it be urged as a difficulty in his account, that the deluge 
must have obliterated all traces of the four rivers into which 
the paradisaical stream was divided, it may be replied, that 
there is no reason for admitting such a destruction of the 
surface of the globe by the flood as the difficulty assumes. 
Besides, the text does not oblige us to maintain that the di- 
vision into four principal streams must have existed before 
the deluge. The representing of one stream running through 
the garden at the time when our first parents inhabited it, 
may have suggested to the sacred writer the formation of 
four rivers from that spot, although they may not have ex- 
isted until after the flood. That the two facts are stated in 
immediate connexion in the narrative, is no proof of contem- 
poraneous existence. 

"From thence it was parted." The ordinary sense of 
fiti is certainly that of place, if indeed this be not its invari- 
able meaning, as I think is most probable. Hengstenberg 
denies that it is ever an adverb of time. See the note on 
Hos. ii. 19, in his Christologie des Alten Testaments, Vol. III. 
p. 103, Keith's Translation, p. 76. This text is cited by 
Professor Bush as proving an ' undoubted indication of time." 
But the particle tDISJa evidently refers to place, namely, 
" the wilderness" just spoken of in the preceding verse : 
" from thence," from that place, " I will give her," the spiri- 
tually returning people, " vineyards." Clearer still to the 
same purpose is the only other passage cited by him, Isa. 
lxv. 20. tDTpfa does not here mean " from that time ;" it in- 
dicates place, the spiritual Jerusalem mentioned in the two 
preceding verses. Gesenius does indeed represent dtf as an 
adverb of time, referring to this very passage in Hosea, and 
to Ps. xvi, 5, cxxxii, 17, and Judg. v. 11. But the references 
are unsatisfactory. The first from the Psalms and that 
from Judges rather indicate locality, as they plainly imply 
circumstance, condition : " there were they in great fear" ; 



180 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part II. 

" there shall they rehearse." The other undoubtedly implies 
locality : " there will I make the horn of David to sprout" ; 
there, namely, in " Zion," the " rest," the " habitation" spoken 
of in v. 13, 14. Isa. xlviii. 16, *}$ dtf Rtl^Q tl?5g seems 
to support this asserted indication of time, but it is not 
clearly in favor of it. *QX§ in this place rather appears to 
correspond with our English usage of * there/ in such 
phrases as : * there is a man, there are some people.' Thus, 
the words might be rendered : ' from the time of its being, 
there (was) 1/ that is, ' I was.' See Robertson's Thesaurus 
and Cocueius's Lexicon on the word, both of whom quote 
from Maimonides DbtE #l)fi dtD Wm, where HB is thus 
used : " the first fundamental principle is to believe that there 
is a perfect being." Comp. Ecc. iii. 17, where our translators 
have perhaps unnecessarily introduced " there is" in italics, 
intimating that the original contains no corresponding term : 
certainly, they have, if the idea is conveyed by dtp. In the 
passage which has suggested these remarks, the connexion 
with the preceding words necessarily requires the sense of 
place : " A river went out of Eden," that is, took its rise 
there, " to water the garden, and from thence it was parted." 

(16.) Rosenmiiller and some other critics regard the ac- 
count of the woman's formation from a part of the man's 
substance, (whether this were a portion of his side or one 
of his ribs,) as an allegory, intended to represent the inti- 
mate union and affection of the marriage relation. But it is 
more consistent with the generally historical character of 
the contents of the book, to consider the account as that of 
a real fact. The attempt to give the transaction a ludicrous 
coloring is but a poor substitution of humor for logic. If 
the woman were to be created, it is no more an impeach- 
ment of the creator's wisdom to suppose him to have used 
a portion of the man's body for the purpose, than it would 



CHAP. ii. 4— -IV. 26.] N0TE3 TO GENESIS. 181 

be to suppose him to have employed any other materials. 
The being who was able to produce the result, was able to 
do it without either pain or even consciousness, were this 
necessary, in the man. There is nothing in the narrative 
which requires a resort to parable. Comp. 1 Cor. xi. 8 : 
" for the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the 
man" ; from which it is probable that St. Paul alludes to 
this account ; and if so, he evidently regards it as a his- 
torical fact. 

(17.) This is undoubtedly the language of the inspired 
author, as is intimated in Matt. xix. 4, 5, where it is intro- 
duced as a divine declaration. The expression of Adam is 
contained in the preceding verse. 

The hypothesis has been advanced, that the second chap- 
ter, with the exception of the first three verses, is a separate 
and independent account of the creation. But it is destitute 
of any solid basis. The designation of the Deity by the 
expression " Lord God," while the term " God" was before 
employed, has often been appealed to in proof of the inde- 
pendent origin of these portions of Genesis. But this argu- 
ment can hardly be thought of much weight, as these vari- 
ous appellations may be designedly chosen in reference to 
their genuine meaning, or the use of them may be inciden- 
tal, or the same writer may habitually use different words 
at different times. In some places the terms appear to be 
used indiscriminately. The subject has already been treated 
of in the Introduction. Rosenmuller, who once attached 
great importance to the argument drawn from the use of 
these different terms, afterwards abandoned it as untenable. 
Neither is the apparent repetition in part of the narrative of 
the creation any stronger. For, either it is a retrospective 
reference to what was before related, and is intended to in- 
troduce something new, as in v. 18 ss. ; or it is essential to 



182 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part n. 

a clear view of the statement which the author designed to 
make, as in v. 7. The remainder of the portion consists 
altogether of additional matter. 

(18.) The notion of Rosenmuller, that the narrative des- 
cribes the first influence of reason as an active principle, 
which had before lain dormant as it were in the human con- 
stitution, and now shows itself as the source of misery, 
simultaneously with animal propensity, is an extravagant 
hypothesis, alike revolting in its character and unsupported 
by the representation made in the chapter. It assumes, 
moreover, that when God made man in his own image, and 
gave him " dominion over the other works of his hands," 
(Ps. viii. 6. Gen. i. 26 — 28,) he placed the ruler of this lower 
world in the happy condition of early infancy, (" primse in- 
fantise fcelix simplicitas.") Schiller also represents man in 
his original state as acting merely under the influence of 
instinct. * But he breaks away from the leading strings of 
nature's cradling season, and then by the exercise of reason 
is to seek again that state of innocence which he had lost.' 
Thus our first parent's disobedience to the divine law is 
nothing else than ' a falling away from his instinct, the first 
daring effort of his reason, the very commencement of his 
moral being' : ein Abfall von seinem Instinkte — erstes Wag- 
estiick seiner Vernunft, erster Anfang seines moralischen 
Daseyn. The philosopher admits that thus moral evil was 
brought into the creation, but maintains that it was only 
with the view of making moral good possible ; and there- 
fore he regards the fact ' as the happiest and greatest event 
in the history of man' ! Dieser Abfall des Menchen vom 
Instinkte, der das moralische Uebel zwar in die Schopfung 
brachte, aber nur um das moralische Gute darin moglich zu 
machen, ist ohne Widerspruch die gliicklichste und grosste 
Begebenheit in der Menschengeschichte. See his treatise, 



CHAP. II. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 183 

entitled, Etwas uber die erste Menschengesellschaft nach 
dem Leitfaden der Mosaischen Urkunde, section first, which 
bears the title : ' Transition of man to freedom and humani- 
ty' ! Uebergang des Menschen zur Freyheit und Humanitat. 
The treatise may be found in the 16th volume of Schiller's 
Collected Works, Stuttgart and Tubingen, 1819. A believer 
in the inspiration of the history, or even in the truth of the 
facts related, would find it impossible to reconcile such 
views with his faith. Can it be thought that the benevolent 
author of our being would have subjected the first human 
pair to a trial of virtue, the result of which has had an in- 
fluence on the condition of their posterity, when the power 
of reasoning on the case was just beginning to develop 
itself? As such a supposition is incompatible with general 
sentiment and feeling, so it is also inconsistent with the 
whole representation in the book of Genesis. This describes 
the fall of our progenitors from a state of innocence and 
happiness to one of guilt and misery, in consequence of 
their voluntary transgression of God's known law, estab- 
lished as a method of probation and a test of obedience. 

(19.) That t25Hp signifies a serpent is almost universally 
admitted. The use of the word, the authority of the old 
versions, and eastern tradition, incontrovertibly determine 
this meaning. — Of the various views which have been taken 
of this chapter, it will be sufficient for my purpose to state 
the most important ; leaving the candid reader to form his 
own judgment respecting the degree of probability to which 
they are respectively entitled. Each is correct in presum- 
ing the fact of the fall to be the prominent point of the 
narrative.* 



* The reader who is desirous to see what curious and learned 
critics have thought, reasoned, and conjectured on this subject, is 



184 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part II. 

The first view to be mentioned is that which maintains 
the action of a real serpent, and denies any other agent to 
be intended as a tempter. This opinion has had learned 
advocates. It is maintained by the Jewish commentator, 
Abarbanel, supported by Simeon de Muis in the Critici 
Sacri, Tom. I. p. 148, and sanctioned by Dathe, in his note 
(c,) on iii. 1, and Herder in his second letter on the Study 
of Theology, Briefe, das Studium der Theologie betreffend, 
in his Collected Works, published at Stuttgart and Tubingen, 
1829, Vol. XIII. p. 26. These writers suppose the tempta- 
tion to have consisted in the serpent's repeatedly using the 
fruit in Eve's presence, without visible injury, perhaps with 
apparently increased powers, and thus exciting in her the 
inclination to follow his example. The influence of this 
example, and the thoughts that consequently arose in her 
mind, are represented, agreeably to the genius of oriental 
and figurative language, under the image of a conversation. 
In opposition to this hypothesis, it has been urged, that so 
poetic a representation of the simple act of the serpent's 
eating the fruit and thereby giving rise to thoughts and in- 
clinations in the woman's mind, is inconsistent with the 
narrative style of the whole work, in which poetic ma- 
chinery can have little or no place. And great weight 
ought to be attached to the fact, that another agent in the 
temptation is evidently contemplated by the earliest Jewish 
authority, and in the New Testament. This will be more 
particularly exhibited hereafter. 

The second view regards the devil as the principal 
agent, who, in accomplishing his scheme, employed the ser- 
pent as his instrument. Thus the latter appears to reason 
and speak ; the woman converses with him, and is led by the 

referred to the dissertations of Frischmuth, Paschius, and De Hase, 
published in the Thesaurus Theologico-Philologicus, Fol. Amst. 
Pars prima, pp. 55 — 95. 



CHAP. II. 4— iv. 26.] X0TE3 TO GENESIS. 185 

artful representations which the devil enables him to make, 
to break the divine law. The sentence which afterwards 
follows, is to be explained in reference to both the agents. 
This is the view which has been most generally adopted by- 
divines, and is supposed to meet all the requisitions of the 
case, and to accord with the representations elsewhere made 
in scripture and early Jewish writings. It is defended by 
Hengstenberg in his Christology, Vol. I. p. 26 ss. 

There are difficulties in this view of the transaction, 
which appear to some irreconcileable with truth as deduced 
from other parts of scripture and supported by reason # 
They find it difficult to perceive how the supreme being 
could allow such a series of circumstances to go into opera- 
tion, in order to try the virtue of our first parents, consis- 
tently with the views of divine providence and goodness as 
generally exhibited in the Bible. Let it be observed, that 
the difficulty in contemplation does not lie in the fact of their 
being permitted to be tempted. Sound reasons are given 
for this. So far as we know, the trial of virtue may be 
essential to the highest excellence of every created intelli- 
gence, and may be allowed in order to produce the greatest 
amount of moral character. Neither does the difficulty lie 
in the particular test selected. The establishment of a 
character of implicit obedience to the will of God simply as- 
such, was intended to be the result ; and the prohibition of the 
fruit of a particular tree was as well fitted for this purpose 
as any prohibition or demand whatever. But, on the hypo- 
thesis under consideration, the great enemy of God and 
goodness, filled with jealousy at the happiness of the first 
pair, contrives a plan to ruin this happiness, to bring sin and 
misery into the world, and thus to mar the harmony and 
beauty of the almighty makers workmanship ; and in car- 
rying this plan into effect, he works a series of miracles, 
24 



186 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part U/ 

speaking by means of the serpent's organs, thus abusing one 
of God's good creatures,* by making him the instrument in 
the destruction of another, and that other no less a person- 
age than the lord of this lower world, the father of the 
whole human family. This is the point, the miraculous 
character of the action, which is thought to be an insupera- 
ble objection. It is impossible to doubt that the facts 
stated on this hypothesis do imply miracles, unless, indeed, 
the old fable of inferior animals having been endowed with 
the faculties' of reason and speech be renewed in order to 
meet the difficulty. f How many others this would involve*', 
it were a waste of time to point out. Whether any of the 
spiritual agents in the universe, however exalted, possesses 
natural powers adequate to such miraculous result, may 
admit of doubt. On the question connected with this re- 
mark, men of profound thought and acute powers of reason- 
ing have differed ;J so that we cannot assume the devil's 

* As all of God's creatures were good in their respective kinds,; 
(see Gen. i. 31,) the intimation of Horsley, (Biblical Criticism, Vol. I. 
p. 17,) that " the tempter assumed perhaps by necessity the form of 
the serpent, being permitted to assume no better than that of a mean- 
reptile,''' 1 is not admissible. The contemptuous designation of the am-' 
mal is in striking contrast with the notion of those who figure to them- 
selves some glorious creature of remarkable beauty and splendor, who 
is afterwards compelled to suffer degradation of nature and form, as a 
consequence of his having been forcibly made the instrument of the evil 
spirit's wicked machinations ! 

f See the passages from Plato and the Sybilline Oracles quoted by 
Bochart in his Phaleg, Lib. I. cap. i. xv. p. 3, 50, Edit. Tert. Lug* 
Bat. 1692. Abundance of Talmudic and Rabbinical nonsense on this 
subject may be found in Eisenmenger's Entdectes Judenthum, Theil 
I. cap. viii. p. 419 ss. ; although the author seems to give the most ridi- 
culous construction of the Jewish representations, some of. which are 
perhaps figurative. 

X On this point see Hugh Farmer's Dissertation on Miracles, on the 
one side; and, on the other, the Bishop of Clogher's (Clayton's) 



CHAP. ii. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 187 

inability to employ the serpent, as the view of the transac- 
tion supposes him to have done. But whatever opinions 
may be held by different persons respecting the nature of 
miracles and the power necessary to work them, none who 
believe in the being and attributes of God can deny that all 
such power must be under his control, and cannot be used 
except by his permission. In the language of Dr. Jortin, 
" God will not permit evil spirits to delude wise and good 
men to their hurt." 

The questions, then, which every inquirer after truth, who 
determines to make up his mind deliberately and impartially 
on this important topic, must settle, are these : ' Does this 
account of the temptation and fall of our first parents ne- 
cessarily imply that the devil possesses power to work 
miracles ? and if he does, that the Deity would allow him 
to exert it for such a purpose, and under the circumstances 
of the case?'* If an affirmative answer to the former of 
these questions should even be allowed, the latter, it is said, 
can admit of no other than a negative reply, consistently 
with the general views of scripture and the fair results of 
unbiassed reasoning. Under the influence of these and 
other considerations, the truth of the view in contemplation 
is questioned by some, who are conscientious and serious be- 
lievers in revelation. 

The third view to be stated supposes the devil to be the 
only agent in effecting the temptation, and that whatever is 

Chronology of the Hebrew Bible Vindicated, p. 252 ss. ; Horsley's 
Sermon on Mark vii. 37; Jorti>*'s Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, 
Lond. 1805, Vol. II. p. 1 ss. ; and Le Clerc on Exod. vii. 11. 

* That any one should suppose the Deity himself to have wrought 
the miracle, is too preposterous to be taken into consideration. Neither 
is it of any consequence to examine the question, in what light Eve 
herself would have regarded the transaction, and whether her know- 
ledge of the natural powers of the brute creation were sufficient to 
enable her to ascertain the truth. 



188 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART n . 

said respecting the serpent is figurative. It is worthy of 
notice, that the sacred books of the ancient Persians repre- 
sent the evil principle as tempting the parents of the human 
race,* and as coming to earth in the form of a serpent.f 
And it is yet more important, that the Jewish tradition and 
the New Testament speak of the devil as the tempter, and 
represent him under the same figure. In the book of Wis- 
dom, ii. 24, we find the expression, " through envy of the 
devil came death into the world ;" and in Bereshith Rabba, 
(an old and extensive commentary,) the book Sohar, and 
other Jewish authorities, Sammael, by whom is meant the 
devil, is represented as the serpent by whom Eve was de- 
ceived. See the passages in Schoettgen's Horse Hebraicse, 
on John viii. 44, and Rev. xii. 7, 9 ; also, in Eisenmenger's 
Entdecktes Judenthum, Theil I. cap. xviii. p. 831 ss. Thus 
in Rev. xii. 9. xx. 2, the devil is called " the great dragon" 
and " that old serpent" ; (the ^iWpft "©HD of the Jewish 
writers ;) and also, without an epithet, " the dragon" and 
"the serpent." See xii. 13 — 17. And it cannot reasonably 
be doubted, say the advocates of this view, that in the same 
figurative sense the word is used without an epithet by St. 
Paul : " as the serpent beguiled Eve," 2 Cor. xi. 3. In John 
viii. 44, our Lord calls the devil " a manslayer from the be- 
ginning," which, in its most natural meaning, refers to him 
as the original tempter by whom sin and death were brought 
into the world. The agency of the devil in the temptation 
of the first human pair, seems therefore to be evidently the 
doctrine of the New Testament and of the ancient Jewish 
church. And it is equally evident, that the tempter is him- 

* See Kleuker's Zendavesta in August Hahn's Lehrbuch des 
Christlichen Glaubens, Leip. 1828, p. 347 ss. 

f Zend, in Hengstenberg, ubi sup. p. 29, 30, and Keith's Trans- 
lation, p. 29. 



CHAP. II. 4— IV. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 189 

self designated by the term used in the original record 
under consideration. 

If now, say they who defend this third view, the inspired 
author of this record should have intended to denote no 
other agent, the difficulties which otherwise embarrass the 
narrative are removed. By the permission, yet under the 
control of God, the devil tempts our first parents to trans- 
gress the law which had been imposed as the test of obedi- 
ence. He holds communication with the woman, and in- 
duces her to suspect the truth of the divine threatening, and 
to believe that participation in the fruit would be attended 
with a vast increase of angelic and perhaps of divine know- 
ledge. These real facts of the case are represented under 
the veil of allegory. The serpent is selected to represent 
the devil on account of his proverbial cunning, and because 
of the very general antipathy with which this class of ani- 
mals is regarded by mankind. That part of the curse which 
is generally supposed to have been denounced against the 
reptile itself, is in fact meant for the devil. The language 
is such as would have been employed had a real serpent 
been intended ; but this is consistent with the parabolical 
character of the representation, and even necessary in order 
to sustain it. That such language presents no real objection 
to the view which they endeavor to defend, they maintain 
must be allowed by all who put a figurative construction on 
the latter part of the curse : " it shall bruise thy head, and 
thou shalt bruise his heel." But this is done by the whole 
body of orthodox commentators ; and, indeed, with the best 
reason, as a literal interpretation would be miserably frigid, 
utterly unworthy of the solemn occasion, and highly incon- 
sistent with the infinite dignity of the speaker, and the awful 
condition of the parties addressed. The expression : " on 
thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days 
of thy life," does not necessarily imply a change of form or 



190 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part H, 

outward appearance, and a literal use of dust for food. 
The former must not be assumed, for a large proportion of 
reflecting readers will regard it as improbable ;* and the 
latter is obviously untrue, as serpents cannot be said to feed 
on dust, any more than other animals who take their food 
from the ground. The language denotes great degradation, 
utter subjection, the most abject prostration in the presence 
of a triumphant opposing power. See Ps. lxxii. 9. cii. 10. 
Isa. xlix. 23, where the phrase, " to eaf or " lick the dust," 
can have no other meaning. The verbs b5& and -JJlb are 
both used in this connexion. See the second reference to 
the Psalms, and compare Micah vii. 17. 

The objections to this view and the arguments to prove 
that a real serpent must be intended, may be identified. It 
is necessary to examine them, and as they are urged by 
Hengstenberg, I shall state them in his language. 

" It is beyond all doubt, that a real serpent was engaged 
in the temptation, and consequently the opinion of those 
must be rejected, who regard the serpent as merely a sym- 
bolical designation of the evil spirit. This opinion would 

* The notion of several Jewish and Christian expositors, (see Frisch- 
muth's Dissertation before referred to, cap. I. § 22,) that the creature 
was originally provided with legs, which on this occasion were cut off, 
("l^p^l lb VTl d^bTTl, Rashi;) and that of some other commenta- 
tors, that its primitive form was splendid and imposing, similar to that 
in which a seraph would display himself, are alike unfounded in the 
narrative or meaning of the word, and, I think, equally unreasonable. 
An old Jewish gloss quoted by Maimonides, in his More Nevochim, 
Part II. chap. 30, fol. 43, (Jfo) Berl. edition, 1795, and in Buxtorf's 
Translation, p. 280, 281, may be regarded as the climax of such fan- 
cies. Here it is said, that the serpent was an animal as large as a 
camel, that it might be ridden on, that Sammael, which is another term 
for Satan, rode on it when Eve was deceived, and that the term em- 
ployed in the text designates both agents. See the Proteuangelium 
Paradisiacum of Christopher Helvicus, p. 15, in the Critici Sacri, 
Tom. I. Pars II., at the end of the volume ; and compare Holden's 
Dissertation on the Fall, chap. II. sect. 6, p. 118. 



CHap. ii. 4— iv. 26. J • NOTES TO GENESIS. 191r 

make it necessary, in order to be consistent, that we should 
adopt the allegorical mode of interpretation throughout the 
whole narrative. For in a connected paragraph like this., 
uniformity of interpretation must prevail, and we are not at 
liberty, in the same historical relation, to adopt at one time 
the allegorical or symbolical, and at another the simple and 
literal method. Against the allegorical interpretation of the- 
whole, there are many objections, as the connexion with 
what follows, where the history of the same human pair 
which are brought into view is carried forward, — the ac- 
curate geographical description of paradise, — the fact, that 
the condition of mankind threatened in this narrative as a 
punishment, actually exists, — the absence of every indica-' 
tion from which it might be inferred that the author designed 
to write an allegory and not a history,^-the passages in the 
New Testament, where the account of the fall is referred 
to as a real history, 2 Cor. xi. 3, 1 Tim. ii. 13, 14, Rom. v. 
12, — the embarrassment, uncertainty, and capriciousness of 
the allegorical interpreters, when they attempt to exhibit the 
truth intended to be conveyed, which, if the author had- 
designed his composition for an allegory, must have been so 
obvious as to be easily discovered. 

The presence of a real serpent is proved, moreover, not 
only by the remark, chap. iii. 1, " now the serpent was more 
subtile than any beast of the field," but by the punishment 
denounced, which must necessarily refer, in the first instance- 
to the serpent." Christology, p. 26 s. 

It is not my intention to express any decided opinion in 
favor of the third view now under consideration ; but it 
must be obvious that the remarks which have already been 
made, supply an answer to several of those objections of 
Hengstenberg. Some of the others are irrelative to the 
view itself, and can only apply to the neological, mythic re- 
presentation of the facts contained in the first portions of 



192 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part II. 

Genesis. The reply to the remainder will immediately 
occur to every reflecting mind. The author assumes the 
very principle in question, namely, that consistency requires 
the whole narrative and representation to be regarded as an 
allegory, or else denies any part of it to be such. It is 
assumed also by Horsley, in his Biblical Criticism, Vol. I. 
p. 9, 10, and 17. But this is not to be conceded. Many 
objections, and unanswerable, there truly are to an allegorical 
interpretation of the whole, and of the history which fol- 
lows. But there is no necessity for this. The statements 
made both before and after the narrative in question are so 
stamped with the very image of historical fact, that it would 
be impossible to view them in any other light without a 
manifest perversion of their meaning. And it is maintained 
by those who defend this hypothesis, that the account of the 
fall is also a real history, as it is represented to be in the 
New Testament. This is the question for consideration : 
* Is this real history of the fall of our first parents into sin, 
through the instigation of the devil, whereby they were led 
to disobey God, related in language partly allegorical or 
wholly literal V It must be obvious to every candid mind, 
that the reply to this question has no bearing whatever on 
the fact of the fall or the doctrines deducible from it. 
Whether it be answered in the affirmative or negative, these 
will continue the same. There may be " embarrassment, 
uncertainty, and capriciousness in the attempts of some to 
exhibit the truth intended to be conveyed," but they are 
not essential to a partly allegorical interpretation. 

A resort to allegory might be defended on the ground of 
necessity ; and consequently where the necessity does not 
exist, the narrative is to be explained literally. If the ne- 
cessity be allowed to exist in some parts of a narrative and 
not in others, " uniformity of interpretation" cannot be de- 
manded. The intermixture of the literal and the figurative 



CHAP. ii. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. J 93 

in immediate connexion, and without any intimation except 
what the nature of the case suggests, is very usual in scrip- 
ture. See Matt. viii. 22, " let the dead bury their dead ;" 
1 Thess. iv. 16, 1 Pet. iv. 5, 6, and particularly the literal 
clause in the sixteenth verse of the 80th Psalm, "they 
perish at the rebuke of thy countenance," in connexion with 
the immediately preceding beautiful allegory of the " vine 
brought out of Egypt." Does any interpreter hesitate to 
explain the address of Jotham to the men of Shechem in 
the ninth chapter of Judges, partly as an allegory or para- 
ble, (v. 8 — 15,) and partly according to the literal sense of 
the words? (v. 16 — 20.) Every reader feels that necessity 
demands this, as the literal sense involves an absurdity. 
And on the same principle, the view under consideration 
gives an allegorical sense to what is ascribed to the serpent, 
because a literal one is thought to involve a difficulty in 
reference to the moral character of God, and an inconsis- 
tency with scripture and reason. " If," says Mr. Holden,* 
" it could be satisfactorily established that Satan, without 
using any animal as an organ, deceived Eve, and that in 
consequence * the serpent' is a figurative and symbolical 
name given to him by Moses, it would not overturn the 
literal interpretation. The account may be equally literal 
and authentic, notwithstanding a few metaphorical expres- 
sions or symbolical terms. If the devil be called tETftJl, 
therefore, it will be no reason for turning the whole into 
allegory. The only difference which this circumstance will 
make in our interpretation is, that, in the one case the part 
ascribed to this tiTO!"!, and the commination of it, will 
belong both to the devil and the material serpent, and, in 
the other, to the devil alone ; but the history will be equally 
true and literal. The younger Vitringa, who espouses the 

* Dissertation on the Fall of Man, p. 401, 402. 
25 



194 NOTES TO GENESIS. [fart 11. 

notion that Satan used no brute animal, contends at some 
length, and very ably, that it does not militate against the 
literal and historical sense. See Diss, de Serpente Vetera- 
tore, cap. iv. § 3, et seq." 

Perhaps it may be thought by some, that this third view 
does not entirely remove the difficulty, and that, on the sup- 
position of the presence and agency of the devil in the 
temptation, a miracle must be implied. But this is -fay no 
means a necessary consequence. It is certainly the doc- 
trine of the New Testament, that the devil does now tempt 
men to sin ; but no believer in this scriptural doctrine re- 
gards such agency as miraculous. It is according to the 
ordinary course of nature, as now existing, both as regards 
the tempter and the tempted. And such temptation may be 
all that the narrative under consideration states. The lan- 
guage ascribed to the devil need not have been uttered in 
articulate sounds. To give such a meaning of the phrase- 
ology : " and the serpent said unto the woman," &c. &c, 
it is enough to maintain, that the tempter suggested the thought 
which the words convey. In the communication of the 
thought, the essence of his temptation lies, and not in the 
fact of its having been embodied in language. To illustrate 
this remark by specific references must be unnecessary, as 
the scripture abounds with such language, which cannot 
possibly escape the notice of an attentive reader ; and the 
first chapter of Genesis is a continual exemplification of the 
principle, as the phrase " and God said," which occurs so 
frequently, is generally allowed to denote the determination 
of his will, and not to signify its oral declaration. The 
tempting sentiment did not originate with the woman ; it 
was not the natural working of her own mind ; it was a 
suggestion made by the great enemy of God and goodness. 

But it will perhaps be said : can the woman be imagined 
to address herself to the tempter, or in any way to com- 



CHAP. II. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 195 

municate her thoughts to him, unless he were visibly pre- 
sent ? In reply, it may be asked, wherein lies the difficulty 
of allowing that she might, his real presence being of course 
understood ? Whenever a communication was made by a 
spiritual being, whether the infinitely holy one himself or 
some one of his angels, and replied to by the party to whom 
it was made, is it to be taken for granted, that a visible 
form had been assumed, whereby to make such com- 
munication ? — that the practicability of conveying senti- 
ments, and of replying to them, depended on the visibility 
of the principal agent ? The advocates of the third 
view might reasonably apprehend, that but few would main- 
tain such a position as this. Does any one imagine that 
a visible form appeared to Samuel, when he mistook the 
voice that called him for that of Eli? 1 Sam. hi. 4 — 10. 
When the law was given on Mount Sinai, the Hebrews 
" heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude ; only 
they heard a voice, they saw no manner of similitude.'' 
Deut. iv. 12, 15. And when the Lord Jesus arrested the 
progress of Saul, and called to him in an audible voice, to 
which the persecutor replied orally and received oral direc- 
tions, it is expressly said, that " the men which journeyed 
with him stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no one, 
fwi&'va 8e Gsugowrss" Acts ix. 7. And if visibility be not 
necessary in regard to one spiritual being, why, it might be 
asked, is its necessity assumed in regard to another ? The 
moral character of either cannot be supposed to affect the 
analogy of the cases. " We know not, and perhaps cannot 
comprehend the mode of communication between spiritual 
essences." H olden on the Fall, p. 172. 

On the other hand it may be replied : ' although the visibil- 
ity of the spiritual agent be not contended for, the real mi- 
raculous character of the agency is, in the latter instances, 
undeniable. When the word of the Lord is revealed to 



196 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part II. 

Abraham or any other prophet; when God tries the father 
of the faithful, and, at the end of the trial, calls to him out 
of heaven ; there is, as was doubtless the case at our Lord's 
baptism and transfiguration, and on the occasion mentioned 
m John xii. 28, and in that of Saul's conversion, an audible 
voice, a real miraculous agency.' All this is true ; but 
whether the cases are sufficiently analogous to that of Eve's 
temptation, to afford ground for an argument from the one 
to the other, may admit of some doubt. If the temptation 
were addressed to her by the devil in a visible appearance, 
and conveyed by oral declaration, we should not even then 
too hastily infer that a communication so made, was, at the 
period in contemplation, contrary to the course of things 
then subsisting, and, therefore, miraculous in the sense in 
which it would be to us in the present day. It may be, that 
angelic beings held frequent intercourse with the first human 
pair. And if this were so, the seducer may have presented 
himself to Eve, as readily as any of his brethren who had 
retained their original condition, and the interchange of 
thought between him and the woman may have been 
made in the same way, whether oral or otherwise, as was 
usual on other occasions when angels communicated with 
them. 

The difficulties of the subject, and the very imperfect 
data within our reach, must suggest to every serious in- 
quirer the duty of taking impartial views, and of avoiding 
hasty decisions and crude speculations, founded in fancy, 
rather than careful investigation of inspired truth. 

(20.) To open the eyes is a phrase denoting increase of 
knowledge. It is thus used of Hagar, when the well is 
pointed out to her, (Gen. xxi. 19,) and of the disciples who 
were made to recognize their master at Emmaus, (Luke 
xxiv. 31.) 



CHAP. ii. 4— iv. 26.] N0TE3 TO GENESI3, 197 

(21.) "The seed" or posterity of the woman (v. 15,) de- 
notes mankind, comprehending of course the Saviour him- 
self, the greatest of all her offspring. The miraculous 
character of his birth cannot be proved to be intimated by 
the phrase, for one entirely analogous is applied to man in 
general. See Job xiv. 1. " The seed" or progeny of the 
serpent, are the children of the devil ; that is, agreeably to 
the scriptural use of the word child or son, those who are 
like him in temper and disposition, and whose interests are 
identified with his. It may comprehend, therefore, all in- 
corrigibly wicked men and evil angels. The right of obdu- 
rate sinners of mankind to be regarded as descendants of 
the woman, connected with her and claiming the promise, 
is virtually denied, and such enemies of God are placed in 
the ranks to which they properly belong : " they are of 
their father the devil," John viii. 44. Here then are two 
distinct classes ; the partizans of the kingdom of darkness 
headed by Satan, and those of Eve's posterity who " are 
on the Lord's side," together with the great Redeemer him- 
self, with whom they are united in character and interests. 

In determining the general meaning of the prediction in 
this verse, it is not necessary to settle the original meaning 
of the word UptE. It may be, according to Gesenius and 
Umbreit, the same as that of Cj&jfc'ffif, ' to pant after,' and hence 
may mean, ' to lie in wait for' ; or it may come from the 
Arabic vU&, and mean, as Dathe says, ' to look out for with 
raised head,' (comp. the Greek dtfoxugaSoxia, earnest ex- 
pectation ;) or else from \Ll> ' to scent out.' Onkelos seems 
to have followed this derivation in the latter clause, which 
he renders thus : &3to!? ST^ ntD^nSfl gtSf), ' and thou shalt 
watch for him at the end.' So also the Septuagint, auTog cte 
TYigv)<fsi xs$oCkr\\j, jc, tfu rrigrirfeis au<rS verigvav, and the Vulgate : et 
tu insidiaberis calcaneo ejus. Storr, in his Opuscula Acade- 



198 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part II. 



mica, Vol. II. p. 416 ss., defends another meaning of the 
Arabic word, viz. ' to come close to/ and deduces this as 
the sense of the text : " it (the progeny of the woman) 
shall come close to thy head, that is, shall attack it with 
hostile intent and not in vain, but thou shalt come close to 
his heels, shalt come under them, shalt be trampled under 
foot." See p. 419, s. But this exposition takes the same 
word in the two clauses in opposite senses ; the former con- 
veying the idea of successful hostility, the latter of complete 
prostration under the power of the foe. In Chaldee, the 
word means, ' to wear away, to grind to dust, to scrape, to 
file/ like FlSTjp and C|Sip. Whatever may be the primitive 
meaning of the root, the idea here conveyed in both clauses 
is that of hostility ; and this sense agrees with the only two 
other places in which the word occurs in scripture : Job ix. 
17, " he breaketh me with a tempest," he assaileth me with 
hostile fury; and Ps. cxxxix. 11, where it is used meta- 
phorically, ' darkness shall assail me/ shall overwhelm, 
crush me down, as it were. The degree of injury to be 
sustained by the respective parties is obviously implied in 
the terms * head' and ' heel.' As the head is the seat of life, 
the assailing and crushing of it express complete destruc- 
tion of vital energy, entire prostration of the adversary. 
The antithetic phrase conveys, of course, the idea of injury 
comparatively trifling. 

The promise in this verse does undoubtedly imply the 
doctrine of a Saviour, who should deliver the posterity of 
Eve from the effects of the fall, and destroy the power of 
the tempter ; so that it may well be regarded as the first 
annunciation of the Gospel, involving its great and funda- 
mental truth. But it is conveyed in figurative language, 
and, like many very early predictions, is obscure. How 
far our first parents understood its import, we are unable to 
say. Where the scriptures have withheld information in such 
points, it were folly to affect knowledge. 



CHAP. n. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 199 

(22.) That death in the ordinary sense of the word, 
meaning the separation of the soul and body, is here in- 
tended, is too plain to need proof. Whether any more 
comprehensive sense is implied on the supposition of subse- 
quent rejection of mercy offered through a Saviour, it is 
not consistent with the plan of these notes to examine. 
Doubtless such a sense is a scriptural truth, whether it be 
taught in this history or gathered exclusively from other 
places. As the death which is here plainly threatened, is 
the natural result of that mortal state which was the imme- 
diate effect of the transgression, the language of the origi- 
nal sanction, " the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt 
surely die," admits of an easy interpretation, as the cause of 
dissolution then commenced its operations, and at that very 
time man became mortal. 

(23.) Eve, in Hebrew iTjFfj equivalent to J"pn, life. The 
name was probably imposed some time after, when the 
descendants of the first pair had become considerably 
numerous. 

(24.) The language of the text, " the Lord God made 
coats of skins," is to be explained on the principle, the use 
of which is so common in scripture, whereby an action is 
ascribed to an indirect and remote cause. The meaning is, 
he instructed our first parents to make themselves garments. 
Berger, indeed, in his Praktische Einleitung, Vol. I. p. 63, 
considers this and other representations contained in the 
first chapters of Genesis, as illustrative of the author's gross 
and imperfect conceptions of the divine nature. But it is 
not true, that the narrative represents God as making man 
" cloaths with his own hand," to use this writer's indecorous 
language. It might as well be said, that Jacob himself 
made the coat of Joseph. Comp. xxxvii. 3. 



200 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part II. 

(25.) Vitringa, # and some other critics, suppose the lan- 
guage in the former part of v. 22 to be ironical, implying, 
that the tempter's promise (v. 5,) had failed to result in any 
thing but misery. But the knowing of good and evil, that 
is, the practical and experimental acquaintance with evil in 
contradistinction to good, was an effect of the fall, and the 
comparison here made need not be carried out beyond the 
single point of an increase of knowledge. Before, the man 
was happily ignorant of evil and innocent of its effects ; 
now he is practically acquainted with it in contradistinction 
to good. The supposition of irony is hardly consistent with 
the solemnity of the occasion. The phrase, " like one of 
us," is explained by some in reference to the plurality of 
persons in the Deity. It seems reasonable to give it the 
same sense as the corresponding phrase in v. 5, "ye shall be 
Q^lib^S." The Septuagint renders this, 'like gods,' ws dsoi, 
and this is followed by the Vulgate, " sicut dii." The Chal- 
dee translates Y n 5'l5'l5 'like great ones,' and the Arabic 
R^^^JLobf, ' like the angels' ; the Syriac alone uses the singu- 
lar number, ] q^ ^—a] , ' like God.' Our English translation, 
" like gods," follows the Septuagint, and means, most pro- 
bably, like divine beings, in other words, like angels. Thus 
the word d 1 *"!^ is used in Ps. viii. 6, where it is rendered 
by the Sept. ayyzkoi, a version which is adopted by St. Paul 
in Heb. ii. 7, and undoubtedly gives the sense of the origi- 
nal, although it is not a literal translation. The view sug- 
gested by Rashi, and presented in the note on i. 26, illus- 
trates the phrase, ' like one of us.' 

The account of the Cherubim, glorious celestial beings, 
who were appointed to guard the entrance into paradise, is 

* See his Dissertation, de arbore prudentias in Paradiso, in his Ob- 
servationes Sacras, Lib. iv. cap. xii. § iv. p. 1047. 



CfcAP. II. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 201 

regarded by Michaelis and Dathe as a poetic description of 
thunder and lightning. Comp. Ps. xviii. 9 — 15. But this is 
at variance with the context, which is historical ; and it is 
not required by any difficulties in the case, as such a pro- 
cedure could not but strike a salutary awe into the minds of 
the offenders, fill them with concern for having transgressed 
God's law, and thus deepen their penitential emotions. The 
" flaming sword turning itself every way" denotes the effi- 
ciency of the method employed, and the utter impracticabil- 
ity of counteracting the divine intentions. It is probable 
that the expedient for preventing access to the tree of life, 
continued in operation but a short time, 

(26.) As the scriptures uniformly derive the existence of 
all mankind from Adam and Eve,* it is evident that their 
descendants must have been considerably numerous at the 
time of this transaction. The imperfect notices of Cain's 
apprehension after the divine judgments had been denounced 
against him, and of his subsequent conduct, (v. 14 — 16,) are 
sufficient to establish this point ; and it is quite consistent 
with the remarkable brevity which characterizes the early 
part of Genesis. It was not the author's intention to give 
an entire history of the family of our first parents, but to 
select those incidents to which more than ordinary interest 
was attached, or which were most immediately adapted to 
advance the true knowledge and worship of God. Cain 
may have been Adam's first-born ; but this is uncertain. 
The language in v. 1, merely states that his mother gave 
him a name expressive of acquisition, but whether he was 
the first treasure of this sort given to -his parents, or one 

* The variety of species existing among the human race may not, 
indeed, have yet been satisfactorily explained ; but certainly, it affords 
no proof of the opinion of distinct races derived from different ori- 
ginals. See Wiseman's third and fourth Lectures, which are devoted^ 
to this subject. 

26 



202 NOTES TO GENESIS. [PART IT. 

subsequently added to the social circle, we are not informed. 
The words riltl^ - ^ mean ' with,' ' by,' or " from the Lord," 
and denote Eve's pious recognition of the agency of divine 
providence in giving her this son. Thus, they are well ex- 
plained by the Septuagint, Sta. rS foS, and this is followed by 
the Vulgate, per Deum. fl£ may be elliptical for F\&)2 (comp. 
xlix. 25. 2 Kings xxiii. 35,) or it may be taken in the sense of 
4 with.' See Gesenius, II. 2. The notion that Eve believed 
this son to be the promised Messiah, and avows his divinity 
by calling him Jehovah, is utterly unfounded, and assumes 
a measure of religious knowledge, which there is no proof 
that she possessed. As the name of Abel means vanity, if 
it were imposed immediately on his birth, it was probably 
selected on account of some unknown contemporaneous- 
circumstances illustrative of the vain and uncertain charac- 
ter of human expectations. It is unnecessary to say how 
well the designation corresponds with his melancholy death. 

(27.) This is the sole ground on which the scripture rests 
the procedure of God in reference to the offerings of these 
two brothers. It was " faith" that made Abel's acceptable, 
(Heb. xL4,) that principle of holy, obedience, which, under 
all dispensations, (Heb. iv. 2, 3,) was the condition of favor. 
The faith eulogized in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews, is a 
confident expectation of what God hath promised, and a firm 
conviction of the truth of whatever he hath revealed ; and it 
leads to an uniform acquiescence in whatever he requires. 
This faith was Abel's, whether it acted on revealed views of 
an atoning Saviour to come, or on any other declarations com- 
municated from heaven. And it would be equally acceptable 
in either case, plainly because in either case it would have ori- 
ginated in the same inward character. It has been confidently 
said, that the faith of Abel prompted him to the choice of an 
animal sacrifice, in obedience to a divine institution, and that 



CHAP. II. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 203 

he thereby showed that his hopes were founded on an 
atonement to be made at some future time by the promised 
Messiah. Certainly it were rash to assert the contrary. 
But where is the proof that Abel was so fully acquainted 
with the divine plan for the redemption of mankind ? Doubt- 
less he believed in the promise made to his parents, but we 
have no evidence to satisfy us that he knew the manner in 
which it was to be accomplished ; and where the oracles of 
God are silent, it is wise in human expositors not to affect 
knowledge. The notion that his animal sacrifice was made 
in addition to such an offering as Cain presented, was ad- 
vanced by Kennicott ; but it is unsupported, either by the 
original language of the text, (v. 4,) or by that in Heb. xi. 4, 
to which appeal has been made. The word FiniDft offering, 
on which Kennicott lays great stress, is not confined, as he 
assumes it to be, to " an oblation of the fruit of the ground, 
or an unbloody, in opposition to a bloody sacrifice," but is 
often used for gift in general, and, in the latter part of v. 4, 
is certainly exegetical of the firstlings and fat of the flock. 
Undoubtedly it would not be maintained, that Abel's " offer- 
ing" which God respected, did not comprehend the animal 
victim ; as this, according to the hypothesis, was the very 
thing that gave it value, and showed the offerer's faith. 
That tfXsiova, in Heb. xii. 4, is used of character rather than 
number, is in itself altogether probable ; and it is strange, 
that Dr. Kennicott should say, " that tfXsjwv has not the sense 
of praestantior through the whole New Testament." See 
his Dissertation on the oblations of Cain and Abel, p. 197, 198. 
Matt. xii. 41, 42, are clear instances of this meaning. It 
must be said, that several of Kennicott's criticisms are far- 
fetched and unfounded. — See Magee on the Atonement, 
No. LXII. 

As Abel's faith made his offering acceptable, the want of 
it, proved by the want of obedience, caused the rejection of 



204 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part II. 

Cain's. The character of this man is intimated with suffi- 
cient distinctness by the expostulation of God in v. 7, " if 
thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted ? (or perhaps, 
more in accordance with the Hebrew : ' shall there not be 
elevation' ? in reference to what is said in v, 5, at the end :) 
" and if thou doest not well, &c." It is not to be supposed 
that such an address would be made to a righteous person. 
If the language of the narrative were consistent with any 
doubt on this point, that of the New Testament would en- 
tirely remove it. We are told by St. John, (1 Ep. iii. 12,) 
that " Cain was of the wicked one," and that " he slew his 
brother, because his own works were evil and his brother's 
righteous." See also Jude 11. As the scriptural account of 
these two persons sufficiently explains the grounds of the 
divine procedure in reference to each, sound philosophy, as 
well as common sense, prohibits the indulgence of useless 
speculation. 

It seems most probable, from the connexion of the verse 
which mentions the occupation of the two brothers with 
those which specify the sort of offerings which they made, 
(2 — 4,) that the latter was the natural result of the former. 
But this opinion by no means implies that of the human 
origin of sacrifices. Whether they be regarded as cere- 
monies indicative of covenant relation, or as gifts recog- 
nizing divine authority and right,* this view seems wholly 
at variance with their nature, antiquity, and typical charac- 
ter, as announced in the New Testament. The manner in 
which the offerings of Cain and Abel are introduced, (v. 3,) 
seems to intimate that such a method of propitiating the di- 
vine favor was then commonly practised ; and that, in so 
very early a period of human existence, it should have re- 

* In reference to these two views of the origin of sacrifice, see Jen- 
ning's Jewish Antiquities, and the authorities referred to, in Book I, 
Chap. V. Vol. I. p. 305 ss., Lond. edit. 1808. 



CHAP. II. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 205 

suited from observation of the influence of similar acts on 
men, or reasoning from the action to the wished-for end, is 
in the highest degree improbable. As the old dispensation 
was emblematic of the new, it seems altogether analogous 
to the general representations of scripture, to consider sac- 
rifice as divinely instituted, in order to typify the offering of 
Christ. The Mosaic sacrifices were undoubtedly of this 
nature ; and it is impossible to give a rational account of 
sacrifice, as almost coeval with the origin and co-extensive 
with the existence of man before the promulgation of Chris- 
tianity, without allowing its divine original. The opinion, 
therefore, which has so often been maintained, that the 
beasts, whose skins contributed to form the clothing of our 
fallen parents, had been slain and offered in sacrifice by di- 
vine direction, seems to intimate the true origin of this re- 
markable rite. The case admits of but three possible sup- 
positions. Either the animals referred to were put to death 
by our first parents, to supply their own wants of food or 
clothing ; or they died a natural death ; or they were slain 
as piacular victims. The first is in every view incredible, 
as is proved from the circumstances in which Adam and 
Eve stood. There is no improbability in either of the others. 
God may have exhibited to the culprits the agonies of death 
in the animal frame, in order to show them part of the con- 
sequence of their disobedience, and to make them compre- 
hend with the more feeling, something of the terror of the 
sentence, " thou shalt surely die." Or, he may have in- 
tended by the exhibition to institute the sacrificial rite, as 
emblematic of " the lamb of God slain from the foundation 
of the world." The last view seems most in unison with 
the benevolence of him, who " so loved the world as to give 
his only begotten son." 

(28.) I have employed this language with a view to what 



206 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part II. 

is perhaps the true meaning of v. 7. " If thou doest not 
well" if thou continuest to purpose and act wickedly; "sin 
lieth at the door," it is close at hand, involving guilt and 
punishment, and tempting thee to further acts of iniquity : 
* unto thee is its desire,' it longs to subject thee to its mere- 
tricious influence, and courts thy favor; 'but thou shouldst rule 
over it.' Other meanings have, indeed, been elicited from the 
Hebrew, for which the reader must consult the commenta- 
tors. Magee on the Atonement, No. LXV., gives various 
views, both ancient and modern. He explains the latter 
part of the verse of Abel's subjection to Cain, the elder 
brother : " thus he may become subject to thee, and thou 
mayest have the dominion over him." But this is not sup- 
ported by the meaning of nj^lBft in the other two passages 
in which the word occurs, viz. Gen. iii. 16, and Cant. vii. 11, 
in both of which it is used of the female, and conveys the 
idea of inclination, desire. The same is the meaning of the 

corresponding Arabic word /v*Ui ; and in Rabbinical He- 
brew pW is used in the same sense. The interpretation adopt- 
ed by a certain Rabbi Solomon,* and given also by the best of 
the later Christian interpreters, is probably correct. niTl&b 

b* ipitui yn& na nnpb rms T&n pn ,pi na&n 
.pram man y\wb rinpitfn qa^nnb sn p&smbn nr 
o& nna bna ^^mb nppin^^ Tfcn nafcnn b"i 
:nm n-rann "jti ■£ >nn btuftb Join n^nn " sin lieth 

* The work here referred to is a Commentary on the Book of Genesis, 
written in Rabbinical Hebrew by a learned Jew of Dubno in Russia, 
and printed in the first volume (4to.) of the <1 jIjID '"['"H (raised up, that 
is, prepared way :) a work on the Pentateuch, and some other portions 
of the Old Testament used by the Jews in the Synagogue. It was 
published in Furth, in 1801. Besides the commentaries of this writer, 
and of some other Jews, it contains the Targum of Onkelos, the Com- 
mentary of Rabbi Solomon Jarchi, and a German Translation of the 
whole Pentateuch by the celebrated Moses Mendelsohn, printed in 
Hebrew letters. This publication will be again referred to in these 
notes. 



CHIP. ii. 4— iv. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 20? 

at the door. Iniquity is continually watching to take thy life, 
(or soul ^IIBSID,) and without the intermission of a moment 
lies in wait to cause thee to sin." — " "IflpTlUJn denotes eager 
desire. The meaning is, that the sin (ft&toFTil) continually 
desires to cause thee to sin. But, if thou wilt, thou canst 
conquer it, for the ability is given thee." 

Still it is proper to remark, that in the other passage in 
Genesis where the word occurs, it is followed by the same 
language as in the verse under consideration. In the one : 
" thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over 
thee ;" in the other : " unto thee shall be his desire, and thou 
shalt rule over him." If, therefore, it be allowable to as- 
sume that J"lP : Tffi£l had the general meaning of acquiescence, 
subserviency, thus implying simply inferiority in the one and 
authority and right in the other, it might well refer to Abel's 
obligation to submit to the well known claims of his elder 
brother ; and this indeed would give a very natural inter- 
pretation of the verse. The root of the word p^tf, to run 
after, to desire, would certainly suit such a general mean- 
ing, although there is no direct proof that the derived noun 
was ever used in this sense. 

The eighth verse is probably imperfect. According ta 
the authority of the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septua- 
gint, followed by the Syriac and Vulgate versions, the 
former part of the verse runs thus : ■ And Cain said unto 
Abel his brother, let us go out into the field.' This agrees 
with the words which immediately follow, and I think is 
more probable than Dathe's view, who gives to ^ifafcO"! 
the meaning of ' spoke harshly to,' from the Arabic ; and 
also, than that of Gesenius, " and Cain said (it) unto Abel, 
that is, he told him that which God had said to him in v. 7." 
Robinson's Translation, under *))2#l 1. 

29. The Hebrew of the thirteenth verse is ambiguous. It 



208 NOTES TO GENESIS* j>ART lf« 

may be rendered, 'my iniquity is too great to be forgiven/ (lit- 
erally, ' to forgive' ;) or : 'my punishment is too great to bear.' 
The latter version agrees with what immediately follows ; 
the former gives a reason for what is said in the fifteenth 
verse. — The phrase in the fourteenth, "from thy face I shall 
be hid," may allude to some visible exhibition of divine ma- 
jesty, from all connexion with which Cain was to be de- 
barred ; but most likely it is figurative, in allusion to the 
usage of monarchs, (see note 9, p. 142, 143,) admis- 
sion to whose presence (or face,) was always an indica- 
tion of favor. — The last part of the verse intimates the 
remorse of Cain, and the horror which he supposed his 
fratricide would occasion in the mind of every one not lost 
to the ordinary feelings of nature. 

" The Lord set a mark upon Cain." The absurdities to 
which this erroneous translation has given rise, may well 
be passed over. The inquisitive reader will find them in 
Patrick's note. The term Flifc* is generally used to denote 
an attestation or sign, intended to confirm the truth of some 
declaration, and it is often applied to designate a miraculous 
attestation. As there is nothing in the context which would 
determine the nature of this sign, it is impossible to arrive 
at certainty. — Instead of *pb, therefore, at the beginning of 
the verse, some manuscripts read "p $b, not so ; and this 
sense is given by the Septuagint, Symmachus, Theodotion, 
and by the Syriac and Vulgate versions. It is followed by 
Dathe : " nequaquam." The common reading is the more 
difficult, and, therefore, the more likely to be true. It admits 
of a clear sense, and, I think, it agrees with the use o( 
Slot. t2to in John vii. 22, and Rom. v. 12. The meaning seems 
to be, ' consequently,' consistently with what has been said, 
or is about to be said. 

(30.) The land of Nod, that is, of wandering, or flight $ 
from *i^, " to be driven about, to wander," 



CHAP. II. 4— -IV. 26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 209 

(31.) The fragmentary character of these verses, which 
are also poetic in their structure, makes them necessarily 
obscure. The Jewish fiction appended to this imperfect 
account may be found in Patrick and other commentators. 
It is also given in full in the Rabbinical work, entitled ' the 
Book of lasher,' a translation of which has lately been pub- 
lished in this city. The words in the latter part of v. 23 
may be rendered interrogatively, and thus the innocence of 
Lamech will be contrasted with the guilt of Cain, and the 
groundlessness of the women's uneasiness made evident. 
Or, they may be affirmative, implying that although Lamech 
had indeed slain a young man, it was in self-defence. The 
equivalent phrases, "to my wounding — to my hurt," — may 
intimate, that the danger of being hurt and wounded by this 
youth's attack, compelled him to the act. Or, according to 
another view adopted by Dathe and Rosenmuller, they may 
refer to contemplated aggression against Lamech on the 
part of the friends of the person whom he had killed: "to my 
wounding," that is, so as to result in my being attacked and 
injured. 

(32.) I have endeavored in the analysis to give a meaning 
which combines the two most ancient and satisfactory in- 
terpretations. The Targums and some other Jewish au- 
thorities suppose a direct reference to the rise of idolatry 
and the increase of wickedness, and translate the Hebrew 
word, " profaned" ; a sense which it often bears in Piel. 
Some critics, comparing the words with such places as Isa. 
xliv. 5, xlviii. 1, translate thus : * then it was begun (or, men 
began) to call, (namely, one's self, or to be called,) by the 
name of the Lord.' Thus Dathe. As the invariable mean- 
ing of the phrase in the Old Testament is ' to worship,' the 
usage of language certainly requires the same sense here. 
See the excellent notes of Vossius on the first section of 
27 



210 NOTES TO GENESIS. [PART III. 

Maimonides' Treatise on Idolatry, and those of Rosenmuller 
on this text. — But, as it is evident from incidental notices in the 
history, that the number of Adam's progeny must have been 
very considerable long before this time, it would seem alto- 
gether improbable, that the origin of divine worship, and 
even of public worship, should have been contemporaneous 
with the birth of Enos. This difficulty is avoided by sup- 
posing the sacred writer to use the expression in an em- 
phatic sense, as referring to the public profession of true 
religion in opposition to idolatry and wickedness of every 
kind. The contents of the sixth chapter confirm this view. 



Part III. Chap. v. 1 — vi. 9. 

(33.) Adam is properly a generic term for man, but is 
here employed as a proper name, designating the first of his 
race. It may therefore be translated either ' Adam' or ' man/ 
as the case requires. 






(34.) General view of the discrepancies of the Hebrew, 
Samaritan, and Septuagint chronology until the deluge ; 
from Jahn's Hebrew Bible, p. 12. 

According to the Samaritan, Jared, Methuselah, and 
Lamech died in the same year ; and therefore, probably, it 
is artificially constructed. See Bible de Vence, Tom. I. 
p. 540, ss. 



CHAP. V. 1— VI. 9.] 



NOTES TO GENESIS. 



211 





Before Paternity. 


After Paternity. 


Total. 


Heb. 

130 


Sam. 

130 


Sept. 
230 


Heb. 
800 
807 
815 
840 
830 
800 
300 
782 

595 


Sam. 
800 
807 
815 
840 
830 
785 
300 
653 

600 


Sept 

700 

707 

715 

740 

730 

800 

200 

782 
802 

565 


Heb. 

930 
912 
905 
910 
895 
962 
365 
969 

777 


Sam. 
930 
912 
905 
910 
895 
847 
365 
720 

653 


Sept. 
930 
912 
905 
910 
895 
962 
365 
969 

753 


Adam 


Seth 


105 

90 
70 
65 


105 
90 
70 
65 


205 
190 
170 
165 


Enos 


Cainan 


Mahalaleel 


Jared 


162 
65 

187 

182 


62 
65 
67 

53 


162 

165 

187 
167 

188 


Enoch 


Methuselah. . . . 


Lamech 


Noah 


500 
1556 
1656 


500 
1207 
1307 


500 
2172 

2272 














Total 


Deluge. . . . 



It is observable, that the construction of the notice of 
Noah in v. 32, differs from that of all the preceding notices. 
These state the age of the individual spoken of, first, before 
paternity is mentioned ; secondly, the time he afterwards 
lived ; and, thirdly, the whole sum of his life. Here it is 
said : " and Noah was five hundred years old ; and Noah 
begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth." The difference is easily 
accounted for. The three sons of Noah are introduced, and 
not merely the first born, because they make so prominent 
a figure in the history which immediately follows. After giv- 
ing an account of the flood, with the cause that gave rise to it, 
and some important matters closely connected with it, 
(vi. 1 — ix. 27,) the author proceeds with the genealogy in 



212 NOTES TO GENESIS. [past m. 

ix, 28, 29 : " And Noah lived after the flood three hundred 
and fifty years. And all the days of Noah were nine hun- 
dred and fifty years, and he died." It is remarkable, that 
the same method of representation is pursued in xlvii. 28 : 
" And Jacob lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years 5 
so the whole age of Jacob was an hundred forty and seven 
years." In the former case, the period that Noah lived 
after the flood is first stated, with which the time that Ja- 
cob lived in Egypt corresponds. This is followed, in the 
one case, by a notice of " all the days of Noah," and, in the 
other, of " the whole age of Jacob." — The possibility of 
these two portions having been written by different authors, 
is, of course, undeniable, as one writer might readily imitate 
another ; but, certainly, the commonly received opinion, that 
the whole book is the work of one individual, harmonizes 
exactly with the internal evidence hence resulting. 

(35.) The phrase " walked with God," which is used of 
Enoch in v. 22, 24, denotes friendly and intimate inter- 
course, and consequently implies similarity of character. 
Comp. the Heb. in 1 Sam. xxv. 15, and Amos hi. 3. The 
Targum of Onkelos explains the general sense : ' walked in 
the fear of God.' To the same purpose the Septuagint 
&vage<frv\<ts, which is employed also in Heb. xi. 5, " he pleased 
God." — Perhaps, indeed, the Hebrew narrative would not 
alone justify a positive opinion in favor of Enoch's transla- 
tion, but the passage in the epistle just referred to, is de- 
cisive with all who acknowledge its divine authority. Still 
the Hebrew alone would suggest something extraordinary. 
For while it is said of every other patriarch in this genealo- 
gical list, " and he died" ; the language used respecting 
Enoch is very different : " he was not, for God took him." 
It is not therefore surprising that the oldest Jewish interpre- 
ters, the author of the Apocryphal Book of Wisdom, xliv. 



chap. v. I— VI. 9.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 213 

16, and the Targumists. Onkelos and Pseudo- Jonathan, 
agree in the opinion that Enoch was translated to heaven. 
And, indeed, to suppose that the holy man's piety was re- 
warded with an early death, as must be allowed unless he 
were removed alive like Elijah, would be entirely inconsis- 
tent with the representations which pervade the Old Testa- 
ment. " Length of days" and numerous offspring remune- 
rate the devoted servant of God. 

(36.) It is uncertain whether Noah's name were imposed 
immediately on his birth, or on some subsequent occasion. 
He is called H5 rest, and yet his father says, this one ttSfllP. 
will comfort us. The Septuagint either read the text dif- 
ferently, or it explains the meaning : (SiavcMrautfei V a £> shall 
give us rest ; and several commentators would, by a slight 
alteration of the text, adapt it to this sense. They propose 
to read ^ITSI. But all such expedients are unnecessary. 
^farO"! rather appears to be an allusion to 515, or a parono- 
masia with it, than intended to give an etymological reason 
of the name. Comp. Gen. xlix. 19, where we have 
^lJTW ^mS ^5' wnere tne paronomasia is equally evident, 
although the association arising from the meaning of the 
words is very indistinct. 

(37.) This appears to be the most satisfactory exposition 
of the text. That magistrates are intended by the phrase, 
" sons of God" ; or that the higher ranks are said to have 
amalgamated with the lower, or (as very ancient interpret- 
ers, both Jewish and Christian, maintained,) that angels are 
represented as having had intercourse with women, whence 
giants are said to have sprung, the demigods and heroes of 
ancient mythology, are notions, which, however they may 
vary in degiees of extravagance, are alike unsupported by 
sober and rational investigation. It is surprising that 
Drechsler (ubi sup. p. 91, 92.) attempts to defend the last 



214 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART m . 

mentioned sense of the phrase " sons of God." He supposes 
fallen angels to be meant, and, in proof of their being called 
by this appellation, appeals to Job i. 6, ii. 2. But here, and 
in xxxviii. 7, of the same book, holy angels are evidently 
designated. This is indisputable in the last passage. And 
in the other two, Satan is not said to be one of the sons of 
God ; it is merely said that he presented himself among 
them. This would seem to be very unnecessarily intro- 
duced, if he belonged to their number ; whereas, if he ap- 
peared in the light of an informer or accuser, intruding 
among beings with whom he had no right to associate, the 
notice of his presence in this holy company is altogether 
natural. The sons of God are probably those of the pious 
race, and the daughters of men, the ungodly, (idolators per- 
haps. Comp. iv. 26,) who appear to be so called by anti- 
thesis, as they are styled in the New Testament, children of 
the devil, or of this world. See 1 John iii. 10. Luke xvi. 8. 

(38.) *liT"8ib. For the various interpretations of this 
phrase, see the commentators. All the most important views 
may be found in Dathe's note. Most of the ancient versions 
give the sense of ' shall not remain' ; s ^ xara^siwi. Sept. 
non permanebit: Vulg. Probably they read V\b^ or isfjj 
although Gesenius thinks this supposition unnecessary. See 
him on the word Vft or ITTf. His own view is not very intel- 
ligible, either in the original Latin or the English translation. 
" In the first edition of the larger Lexicon," which contains, 
he says, " the view to which he has returned," his language 
is as follows : " My spirit, the divine which dwells in them, 
(the divine nature imparted to them,) shall not be debased, 
dishonored in man forever, since he is flesh ; or, through his 
criminal conduct ; flesh is he." See Handworterbuch, 
Leipzig, 1810, Vol. I. p. 187. Ewald gives a similar in- 
terpretation. Komposition der Genesis, p. 203, 204, note. 
Their meaning appears to be, that the spirit should not al- 






CHAP. v. 1— vi. 9.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 215 

ways be subjected, as it were, to degradation and contempt 
by dwelling among such abandoned men. This interpreta- 
tion of the word " spirit" was probably taken from the Dub- 
nian Commentator in the 5lMbt> ^PH : at least, it accords with 
that given by him. "My celestial (rftVb^n) spirit which I 
breathed into man shall not continually contend and strive 
with flesh. T©!2 &"l!l 03tE>!2: because he truly is flesh, and 
not divine spirit (literally, spirit of God, 1"pb2 FlTl,) alone, 
but compounded of flesh and spirit." 

Ewald (ubi sup.) remarks further, that if the expression, 
" his days shall be one hundred and twenty years," related 
to the term of respite allowed to the antediluvians, the 
fact that such a period was granted, would afterwards be 
stated, agreeably to the writer's usage. But we may well 
ask in this author's own language on another occasion, 
(p. 214,) " must the narrator cling so tenaciously to his 
form V The execution of some threats he has indeed par- 
ticularly specified, but not of all ; and why should it be as- 
sumed that this must be of the number ? The coming of 
the flood at the proper time would sufficiently mark the ac- 
complishment of the threat to the party chiefly interested ; 
and to others living after the flood, the fact itself as a divine 
judgment and warning was all important, not its chronolo- 
gical relation to the period of the threatening. 

If yfVj be equivalent to ^T (and verbs "12 and "^ often 
interchange their middle radical,) the old translation of 
Symmachus S x^'vsi will give the sense, and this coincides 
with our own version, " shall not strive with," as one does, 
who is always judging, and censuring another's conduct. Or, 
agreeably to the Hebrew use of the word ' judge,' it may 
convey the idea of government, as if it were said, ' my Spirit 
shall not always rule* (endeavor to rule) in man ; after a 
limited period, I will abandon him to his guilt and its 
punishment.' 



216 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part IV^ 

(39.) E^bSSrf or d^£|fl : both forms occur in Num. 
xiii. 33. These are the only two places in which the word 
is found. Our translation renders it " giants," in accordance 
with some of the ancient versions, particularly the Septua- 
gint and Vulgate, which have yi'yavr^, gigantes. Aquila has 
fiwxg, Symmachus iifiieiitrovrag, Onkelos &;H 5l5 powerful, the 
Syriac *| SajL^ > the same. Other authorities give it the sense 
of revolters, apostates. Any one of these meanings agrees 
with the radical idea of the word, and suits the context. The 
Dubnian Commentator on v. 2 thinks it implies inferiority, 
degeneracy, a falling off as we say, from their forefathers. 
He refers to Job xii. 3, 03fa ^pjfc* b&j~^b, I am not in- 
ferior to you." 

Part IV. Chap. vi. 9 — xi. 29. 

(40.) yn$rrJn£,tt>ita the earth. So Onkelos d? ; the Sep- 
tuagint gives the meaning xoti <n?v y?jv. Some prefer the sense of 
from, as if it were tT\$)2, but this is unnecessary. The 
threatened destruction of the earth by no means implies its 
being reduced to fragments, or the crushing to pieces (as some, 
especially those of theHutchinsonian school, have maintained) 
of its exterior crust. General desolation and ruin of the sur- 
face, are what is meant. Whether the deluge extended over 
the whole earth, or was confined to those regions of Asia 
which are contiguous to the countries in which mankind 
originally settled, has been much disputed. The strong and 
unqualified representations contained in the account itself, 
(see particularly vii. 19 ss.) would seem to favor the affir- 
mative. But, on the other hand, it may be said with truth 
that general statements are often limited by the very na- 
ture of the case, and the author may be supposed to speak 
of the world as then known. Certain it is, that language 
equally general in its meaning with that here employed in 



CHAP. vi. 9— ix. 29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 21*7 

reference to the flood, is elsewhere used in a very limited 
sense. Thus we read in Gen. xli. 54, 56, 57, that " the 
dearth was in all lands, and the famine was over all the face 
of the earth, and all countries came into Egypt to buy corn, 
because the famine was sore in all lands ;" while it is evi- 
dent, from the very nature of the case, that the application 
to Egypt for food must have been partial, and therefore, in 
all probability, so also was the distress. In the same sort 
of language, God tells the Israelites, that he "will begin to 
put the fear of them and the dread of them upon the na- 
tions that are under the whole heaven, who shall hear re- 
port of them and shall tremble," (Deut. ii. 25 ;) although it 
is not to be doubted, that he refers to the immediately sur- 
rounding nations, and those that might hear of the wonders 
performed in favor of the Hebrew people. In the same 
limited sense it is said in general terms, on occasion of the 
Pentecostal feast, that " there were dwelling at Jerusalem 
devout men, out of every nation under heaven," (Acts ii. 5 ;) 
and again, that " the gospel had been preached to every 
creature which is under heaven." (Col. i. 23.) It is needless 
to multiply instances of this usage. The universality of the 
flood cannot be proved solely from the unlimited nature of 
the language expressing it ; although this language ought to 
be understood in its plainest sense, as asserting a general 
deluge, unless sufficient reason can be given for qualifying 
it by certain limitations. 

It is said again, that the supposition of a general deluge 
corresponds with universal tradition, which " furnishes am- 
ple proof that this great event is indelibly graven upon the 
memory of the human race, and attested by the consent of 
mankind." 

But, as it is correctly remarked by Dr. Smith, (ubi sup.- 
p. 92,) " it is remarkable, that learned writers have not per- 
ceived the absence of any logical connexion between the' 
28. 



218 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part it. 

universality of historical tradition, and a geographical uni- 
versality of the deluge itself. Immense pains have been 
taken, and very laudably, to collect the traditions of tribes 
and nations deposing to the fact of an overwhelming deluge 
in the days of their remotest ancestors ; and it has been 
hence concluded, since those traditions existed in every 
quarter of the globe, that the deluge had belonged to every 
region. But it seems to have been forgotten, that each of 
those traditionary and historical notices referred to one and 
the same locality, the seat of the family of Noah, the cradle 
of the human race." Most undoubtedly the fact of an uni- 
versal deluge, and the universally existing tradition of a 
deluge, are far from being identical. Those who have 
argued from the latter to the former, seem to have over- 
looked the important fact, that, as all men sprang from 
Noah, their traditions are to be traced to their origin, and 
that they would naturally bring these traditions to any re- 
gion in which they might subsequently settle. Commenta- 
tors have reasoned as if the traditions had originated in the 
various regions in which every diversity of the human spe- 
cies has been found. 

Some of the most remarkable traditionary circumstances 
are mentioned in Bochart's Phaleg, Lib. I. cap. i., a work 
replete with curious and interesting learning, and in Mau- 
rice's History of Hindostan, Part III. chap. xiii. Vol. I. 
p. 453 ss. Many of them are stated by Professor Hitch- 
cock, in his Essay, entitled " The Historical and Geological 
Deluges Compared," published in the Biblical Repository, 
No. XXV. January, 1837, p. 81—93. A vast deal of cu- 
rious and interesting matter relating to the ancient traditions 
of the deluge, has been collected by Bryant, in the third 
volume of his Analysis of Mythology. If we cannot al- 
ways acquiesce in the soundness of the author's reasoning, 
we cannot but be surprised at the extent of his reading, and 



CHAP. VI. 9— ix. 29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 219 

must acknowledge that he has adduced very much from 
ancient authorities corroborative of the scriptural account. 
See also Wiseman's Lectures on the connexion between sci- 
ence and revealed religion, Lect. IX. p. 289 ss. 

The universality of the deluge has also been supposed to 
be confirmed by numerous phenomena exhibited in various 
parts of the strata which form the exterior of the globe. 
It is unnecessary to state them in detail. Recent geological 
investigations and discoveries have induced many learned 
and scientific men, some of whom are also sincere believers 
in the inspiration of the Old Testament, to ascribe these 
phenomena to the natural influence of causes operating in 
periods of time antecedent to the present arrangement and 
formation of the earth. It is difficult to perceive how they 
could possibly have been produced by the ordinary opera- 
tions of any deluge. 

An argument has been drawn in favor of the deluge hav- 
ing been partial, from the supposed comparative paucity of 
mankind. This is thought to be supported by " the paucity 
of birth which not obscurely shows itself in the genealogi- 
cal table, (Gen. v. 3 — 28,) the length of individual lives" 
being supposed " to compensate for the slowness of multi- 
plication," and " moral depravity" having its natural " effect 
in diminishing the fecundity of the human species." Smith, 
p. 250. The correctness and applicability of this last ob- 
servation need not be questioned. But when the author 
proceeds to confirm his reasoning by remarking " that no 
children of Noah are mentioned till he was five hundred 
years old, and that a century later, his three sons, each hav- 
ing a wife, had no children," meaning undoubtedly had never 
become parents, (p. 251 ;) he adopts a species of argumen- 
tation, which, although too commonly applied to the scrip- 
tures, is nevertheless unsound. He reasons from the absence 
of information respecting a subject to its want of existence. 



220 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART IVf 

Is it certain that Noah's three sons, each of whom was mar*; 
ried, had had no children when their father was six hundred 
years old, because no children are mentioned ? If such a. 
method of reasoning were applied to the scriptural narrative 
of Cain and Abel, the facts related concerning them would 
be altogether inexplicable. The length of antediluvian life, 
after all proper allowance for its dissoluteness, during the 
period of: time under consideration, would admit of the ex- 
istence of a large population on the globe at the time of 
the flood. ■' , 

In favor of the universality of the deluge, the reader is 
referred to a dissertation in the Sainte Bible, en Latin et en 
Frangois, avec des notes litterales, critiques et historiques,' 
des prefaces et des dissertations, drawn from the works of 
Calmet, De Vence and others, in 17 vols, 4to., Tome I. 
p. 414—438. The author replies to the objections of Vossius, 
who maintained the opinion, that the deluge was partial. 
In this opinion, Dathe also coincides ;; but he advances noth- 
ing new in support of it. See his note (d) on vii. 20. 

> V 1 i ) ■ '.'I; ■ ) 

■ (41.) Bochart has shown that, in all probability, the term 
l&i means cypress, which, indeed, seems to be radically the 
same word. See his Phaleg, Lib. I. cap. iv. p. 22, 23.— 
Schultens supposes *)ri£ to be equivalent to the Arabic 

Ipj, the back, and to be used for the roof of the ark, the 
elevation of which was to be no more than a cubit, allow;- 
ing, he thinks, sufficient descent to carry off the rain. And 
this, he supposes, is what is meant by the Septuagint, 
stf»tfuv<xywv, which he , explains by contracting, " col ligens et 
contrahens, superne facies arcam." See his Observations 
ad Genesin, Cap.' I, It is quite as probable, however, that 
iltfidwayuv is used to denote the collecting of materials for 
%h& building.rrrQur translation, ," window" agrees with the 
Vulgate * fenestram,' and the version of Symmachus diaqmsg* 



CHAP. vi. 9— ix. 29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 221 

And it is probably correct, the singular being used collec- 
tively. The word properly means light, and seems to be 
employed by a metonymy for window. With the exception' 
of this text, it is always found in the dual form. It is used 
to express midday, thus characterized by its bright, clear,' 
light. 

(42.) The distinction of clean and unclean animals most 
likely originated in the laws and usages connected with sacri- 
fices, although it is certain that subsequently it obtained also in 
reference to meats which were considered as fit for food. In 
common with many other patriarchal institutions, it after- 
wards became a law of the Mosaic system, in which several of 
those institutions were incorporated. See the dissertation 
of H. S. Reimar, entitled, Cogitationes de legibus Mosaicis 
ante Mosen, in the Commentationes Theologicse, edited by 
Velthusen, Kuinoel, and Ruperti, Vol. VI. p. 1 — 74. It has 
been thought that the number of clean animals to be brought 
into the ark was fourteen, but it would be difficult to account 
for so large a number being required, and the Hebrews ex- 
press the same number of different species or individuals by 
.a reduplication. See especially, Num. in. 47, in the He- 
brew, and Mark vi. 7, 40, in Greek. If seven was regarded 
as a sacred number before the flood, as seems probable 
from the paradisaical origin of the Sabbath, and agrees with 
certain intimations contained in this narrative, (comp. vii. 4. 
; viii. 10, 12;) this would account for the selection. And if all 
the clean animals lived, as is altogether probable, the num- 
ber of each sort would be reduced to an even quantity, 
three of either sex, after Noah had made the offering men- 
tioned in viii. 20. 

A comparison of vi. 20, vii. 2, and vii. 8, 9, seems to 
show a discrepancy. But it is only apparent. In the first, 
two fowls of every sort are mentioned ; in the second, seveft 



222 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part IV. 



fowls, meaning, however, as the preceding verse intimates, 
those which were accounted clean. In the third, it is said : 
" of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of 
fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, there 
went in two and two." But this does not contradict what 
had just been stated. The language is not professedly criti- 
cal, but rather popular. Either the phrase " two and two" 
is to be limited to the unclean animals who had been last 
mentioned, or the meaning is, that two at least of every 
sort, clean as well as unclean, were preserved. It would be 
absurd to suppose, that, in such a matter, a writer of merely 
ordinary intelligence could contradict himself within the 
space of a few lines. 

(43.) The land of Ararat is the Hebrew expression in 2 
Kings xix. 37, where our translators very correctly translate 
it "Armenia." That the ark rested in this region, on the Gor- 
dioean mountains, has been most conclusively evinced, with 
a vast amount of learning, (more suo,) by Bochart, Phaleg, 
Lib. I. cap. iv. 

(44.) The prohibition of " flesh with the life" or " the 
blood," may have originated in motives of humanity, with 
the view of preventing the horrible practice of eating the 
flesh of living creatures. From the character of many of 
the antediluvians, it is not unreasonable to suppose that such 
abuses had been practised before the flood ; and it is well 
known, that since that period uncivilized man has committed 
the same enormity. As the life was thought to subsist in the 
blood, (comp. Deut. xii. 23. So Josephus, Ant. Lib. I. cap. iii. 
§ 8, x w P'£ a'f Aa<ro ?' sv rkru yag sg'lv y\ ^x^' Hudson's edition, p. 
14,) the law may have been intended to interdict even the 
use of blood, in order to excite the greater abhorrence of 
the abuse just mentioned. It had also a religious bearing, 



CHAP. vi. 9— IX. 29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 223 

and was designed to impress on the public mind, the awful 
sanctity of that justice which required the blood of the vic- 
tim to atone for the sinner's guilt. See Levit. xvii. 10 — 14. 

(45.) It is not certain that this law is positive and peremp- 
tory. Like some others, afterwards introduced into the He- 
brew code, it may be merely permissive, to be followed ac- 
cording to the discretion of the judiciary, governed by circum- 
stances, as some Jewish commentators affirm to have been 
the case with respect to the law of retaliation of Ex. xxi. 
24, 25. Levit. xxiv. 19, 20. But if it be a positive com- 
mand, its universal obligation by no means follows. The 
circumstances and condition of mankind may so vary from 
the state in which they were when the law was originally 
promulged, as to make the continuance of the penalty high- 
ly inexpedient and improper. The grounds on which laws 
are mutable or unchangeably binding, is admirably settled 
by Hooker, in his third Book, § 10. His remarks are well 
worthy of attentive consideration. I cannot refrain from 
quoting the following sentence, from its remarkable applica- 
bility to the subject. " Laws, though both ordained of God 
himself, and the end for which they were ordained con- 
tinuing, may notwithstanding cease, if, by alteration of per- 
sons or times, they be found unsufficient to attain unto that 
end. In which respect, why may we not presume that God 
doth even call for such change or alteration as the very con- 
dition of things themselves doth make necessary ?" Vol. I. 
p. 398, Oxford edition, 1793. 

(46.) A clear and interesting view of this prophecy is 
given by Bishop Newton in his first dissertation on the pro- 
phecies. But there is not sufficient reason for reading 
* Ham, the father of Canaan/ instead of " Canaan," as he 
proposes. As the prophecy has in view the descendants of 
the persons named and not the individuals themselves, and 
as it is by no means necessary to assume that all the descen- 



224 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[PART v. 



dants of each individual are intended ; if the servitude pre- 
dicted was to exist chiefly among Ham's posterity through 
Canaan, it becomes a matter comparatively of indifference, 
which name is mentioned. It is not improbable, however, 
that Canaan may have concurred with his father in the in- 
decent conduct which gave rise to the prophecy ; and it is 
very probable, that his name was selected with the view of 
representing to the Hebrews the condition of Canaan's des- 
cendants, as exposed to the infliction of a divine punishment 
for their iniquities, a punishment which the conduct of their 
ancestor had been the occasion of predicting. A satisfac- 
tory exegetical examination of the latter part of this pro- 
phecy is given by Hengstenberg in his Christology, Vol. L 
p. 42 ss. Keith's Translation. For the poetical construction 
of the passage, see Lowth's Lectures on the sacred poetry 
of the Hebrews, Lect. IV. p. 60 of Gregory's Translation, 
Boston, 1815, 

Part V. Chap. x. 1 — xi. 9. 

(47.) The fullest and most learned commentary on this 
tenth chapter is to be found in the last three books of Bo- 
chart's Phaleg. Other authorities, which may be consulted 
with advantage, are mentioned by Dathe and Rosenmiiller. 
See also Maurice's ancient history of Hindoostan, Vol.' I. 
p. 444 s. — It is evident that several of the names here oc- 
curring, are names of nations ; in some cases they are 
patronymic also, in others merely gentilitious. Thus Gomer, 
Madai, Tiras, Mizraim, Canaan, Sidon, Elam, Ashur, and 
others, (v. 2, 6, 15, 22,) are names of individuals and of 
nations. Most critics consider the plurals in v. 13, 14, and 
elsewhere, as referring exclusively to cities or countries, or 
to their inhabitants. The meaning will be, that the Egyp- 
tians, expressed by the word Misraim, founded the nations 
or colonies denoted by the words Ludim, Anamim, &c, 



CHAP. X. 1— XI. 9.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 225 

Thus also in the sixteenth and following verses, the Jebusite, 
&c. does not appear to designate any particular indivi- 
dual, but is rather to be taken in a collective sense for 
the people respectively, as in 2 Sam. v. 6. " And the king 
and his men went to Jerusalem unto the Jebusites, the inha- 
bitants of the land," where the Hebrew is in the singular, 
p&rt ntpt> ^O^n-b^, as it is also in v. 8, 

Ver. 5. ByiW ^&, territories of the Gentiles ; properly, 
maritime countries, coasts. The word is sometimes used 
for distant nations, countries lying on the sea, at the verge 
(as it were) of the world. In our English version it is al- 
ways translated " islands," except in Jer. xlvii. 4, where it is 
rendered " countries." In Isa. xlii. 15, the supposition that 
" islands" are meant, is so improbable, as almost to involve 
an absurdity. 

(48.) The historians referred to identify Nimrod with 
Zohak or Dhohak, whom they make the brother instead of 
the son of Cush. See D'Herbelot's Bibliotheque Orientale, 
under Dhohak, p. 948, fol. Paris, 1697. If Nimrod's name 
be derived from 1*1/2, 3^J, to rebel, it was probably not 

imposed until his impious and overbearing conduct marked 
him out as the distinguished rebel ' against the divine au- 
thority. Perizonius conjectures that the term Nimrod, whieh 
is the first person plural of the future, may have arisen 
from his frequent and vain-glorious appeals to his impious 
companions, urging them to rebellion against divine authori- 
ty, in which he would employ the word ^"h^!?. See 
his Origines Babylonicee, p. 122. It may indeed denote the 
temper of his mind, but it is not very likely that he gave this 
utterance to such a feeling. The phrase v. 9, " a mighty hunter 
before the Lord," is particularly emphatic. It may express, not 
only courage, strength, agility, adroitness, perseverance, and 
29 



226 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part v. 

such other properties as usually enter into the character of 
a good hunter ; but may intimate, that these qualifications 
were such as would bear the most thorough examination, 
they were possessed by him in the highest degree ; the 
Omniscient himself being the judge, he was a mighty hunter. 
Or else, more probably, it implies the boldness and impu- 
dence of the man, as it is said of the men of Sodom, that 
they "were sinners before the Lord exceedingly." Gen. xiii. 
13. In either case, it will imply, that even the presence of 
Jehovah was no restraint on Nimrod. See Bochart, Lib. 
IV. cap. xii. 

In very ancient periods of the world, when large dis- 
tricts of country were but partially settled, the scattered 
inhabitants were sometimes subjected to great annoyance 
from wild beasts, and consequently persons who exerted 
themselves in exterminating such animals, were regarded as 
benefactors of mankind. It is evident, that to prosecute 
such enterprises with most success, considerable parties of 
men would be necessary, conducted doubtless by some 
leader of distinguished talent and character. It is easy to 
infer that this leader might acquire popularity and attract 
multitudes to his standard, that he must direct the under- 
taking, and give the command, and thus his will would be- 
come the law of the rest. In the event of any difficulties 
or dissensions arising, he would of course become the 
umpire, and thereby his authority would be strengthened 
and enlarged. In the distribution of the skins or other 
spoil, his proportion would probably be the largest. As the 
owners of" property, particularly of cattle, were especially 
interested in the successful issue of such hunts, it is most 
reasonable to suppose that they would encourage the en- 
terprising captain by making him presents. He would 
therefore be in a condition to increase his popularity, by 
giving away what his own immediate wants did not require 



CHAP. x. 1— XI. 9.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 227 

him to keep. Thus his circle of dependants and friends 
would be extended ; and perhaps what was first offered as 
a willing present, soon came to be demanded as a rightful 
tribute. It is easy to see how, in this way, the hunter of 
beasts, acquiring irresistible force and indomitable hardihood 
and courage in his conflicts with tigers and lions, might 
readily raise an army, and become the tyrannical oppressor 
of men, and the insolent contemner of God. And, in all 
probability, this is the history of the rise and power of Nim- 
rod, the great ancient rebel. 

(49.) For the authorities on which this interpretation of 
the names of the cities mentioned in v. 10 is given, the 
reader is referred to Rosenmiillers note. 

(50.) Bochart (ubi sup. p. 229, 230,) contends, that V^V 
is the name of the country Assyria, and that the whole 
clause relates to Nimrod, and ought to be rendered thus : 
1 he went out of that land into Assyria,' that is, he invaded 
that region, took possession of it, and built Nineveh and the 
other cities. No doubt the original word often means Assy- 
ria, and the 51 local is not necessary, although, to avoid 
ambiguity, its use would have been highly expedient. No 
doubt, too, the word &2T is frequently used for going out to 
war or battle ; but this proves nothing, for it is very often 
used where no hostility can possibly be implied. Nor is 
there much force in what is further alleged by Bochart ; that 
any notice of Ashur, a son of Shem, whose birth is men- 
tioned in the twenty-second verse, is here out of place, as 
the immediate context is limited to an account of Ham's 
descendants. It is not uncommon with the sacred writers 
to introduce some circumstances of the history of particular 
persons, although their connexion with the main subject of 
the context is only incidental. We have an illustration of 
this in Gen. xxviii. 6 — 9, where Esau's marrving an addi- 



828 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART v. 

tional wife is mentioned in the midst of a continuous narra- 
tive of Jacob's journey to Padan-Aram ; and another in 
1 Chron. v. 1,2, where the cause of Reuben's being deprived 
of the birth-right, together with the favors bestowed on 
Joseph and Judah, are merely appendages to the prominent 
topic. If now the character of Nimrod were such as scrip- 
ture and eastern history allow us to suppose, it is easy to 
see why a man of character and independence, feeling him- 
self unable to cope with an oppressive despot, should leave 
his country, and settle where he might exert his talents and 
influence without control. I conclude, therefore, that the 
common translation, which coincides with most of the an- 
cient versions, is to be preferred. 

Rollin, in Kis ancient History, Vol. II. p. 181, London, 
1795, follows Bochart, and of course makes Nimrod the 
founder of the old Assyrian monarchy. Hales also, in his 
New Analysis of Chronology, adopts the same view. See 
Vol. I. p. 447, and Vol. II. p. 50. On the other hand, Bryant, 
in his very learned and curious, though often fanciful, Ana- 
lysis of Ancient Mythology, defends the common translation. 
Vol. VI. p. 192 ss. 3rd edit. Lond. 1807. So also Schuck- 
ford, in his Sacred and Profane History Connected, Vol. I. 
p. 161 ss. Lond. 1819. — According to the former view, the 
ancient Babylonian monarchy was the commencement of the 
kingdom of Nimrod, who, having conquered Assyria, built 
Nineveh, calling it after his son and successor Ninus, who 
probably enlarged and finished it. According to the latter, 
the ancient Assyrian empire was founded by Ashur, and was 
distinct from the ancient Babylonian, until Ninus, successor 
to Ashur, subdued the Babylonian and other neighboring 
people, merging them in the Assyrian empire. 

(51, in the Analysis erroneously printed 50.) 15^"^^ 
v., 21 s is translated by some critics, following Rashi, 'children 






CHAP. x. 1— XI. 9.] NOTES TO GENESIS, 229 

of the other side/ meaning the other side of the Euphrates ; 
and thus Eber will be represented as the ancestor of 
those people, (that is, of the larger proportion of them,) 
who lived on the east of that river. But the ellipsis of a 
word to express the river is harsh and unnatural. Parkhurst 
translates it, " children of passage or pilgrimage," and thinks it 
refers to their " itinerant" character, " passing from one place 
to another, until their settlement in Canaan, and confessing 
themselves pilgrims upon earth." See his Hebrew Lexicon 
under 1i^ I., or Greek Lex. in 'Efigaios. He follows Julius 
Bate, in his Critica Hebraea, or Hebrew-English Dictionary. 
The principal reason for either of these versions is found in 
an objection urged against that usually received, namely, that 
Shem " was no more the father of the children of his great- 
grand-son Eber, than of his other descendants," But this 
objection is removed by explaining the phrase, " children" 
(or sons) " of Eber," as equivalent to ' Hebrews,' whose an- 
cestor is here said to be Shem, the subject of a divine bene- 
diction. See ix. 26. 

Our English translation makes Japheth " the elder" of the 
two brothers ; but the probability is, that the clause ought to 
be rendered, " the elder brother of Japheth." Dathe, who 
at first adopted the former opinion, afterwards acknowledges 
himself mistaken, and defends the latter. So also Rosen- 
miiller. Both refer to an able essay relating to this subject 
by John F. Schelling, in the Repertorium fiir Biblische und 
Morgenlandische Litteratur, Vol. XVII. p. 1 — 25. There 
seems to be no sufficient reason for departing from the usual 
construction, which places the eldest son first. Patrick re- 
marks that the article prefixed to b"TO elder, "plainly directs 
us to refer the word to him who was last spoken of, namely, 
Japheth." By what usage of the Hebrew language, this 
plain direction is supported, it were difficult to say. Judg. i. 
13, and ix. 5, are evident instances of the contrary, for in 



230 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part v. 

both cases 1t0j?5 plainly refers to the former noun, and 
Professor Bush, who cites these two places, is undoubtedly 
right in saying that " had a uniform mode of rendering been 
pursued, the words before us would no doubt have been 
translated, ' Shem, the elder brother of Japheth.' " Still, he 
considers the word bil^H as pointing not to seniority of 
age, but to priority in honor ;" because " the evidence of 
Japheth's being the eldest of the three sons of Noah is too 
strong to be set aside." The only evidence alleged by him 
is what I am about to state from Patrick, which, indeed, is 
somewhat plausible, and is considered by that distinguished 
commentator as a " plain proof" that Japheth was the eldest 
son of his father. On comparing v. 32, vii. 11, and xi. 10, 
it is argued, that Noah was five hundred years old when the 
eldest of his three sons was born, and that he was five hun- 
dred and two on the birth of Shem, because he was six 
hundred when he entered into the ark, two years after which 
Shem was one hundred, who must consequently have been 
two years younger than his brother Japheth. But, how little 
dependence is to be placed on this argument will be evident 
to any one, who considers that the scripture very frequently 
uses round numbers, omitting fractional parts. And such 
appears to be the usage in v. 32, as it is in the highest degree 
improbable that Noah became the father of three sons in 
the same year. 

In the genealogical list contained in the fifth chapter, one 
son only of each patriarch is introduced. The three sons of 
Noah are doubtless mentioned, because of the important 
position which they occupy in the subsequent narrative. 

The repetition of circumstances already mentioned, how- 
ever contrary to good usage among occidental authors, is 
very common not only with the Hebrew writers, but also 
with the Arabian. See Drechsler, ubi sup. p. 98, 99, and 
Ewald's Komposition der Genesis, p. 122 ss. 170, 171. This 



CHAP. x. 1— xi. 9.J NOTES TO GENESIS. 231 

remark will account for the frequency of such notices as 
v. 32, vi. 10. vii. 13, ix. 18. Comp. also xi. 10—18, with x. 22, 
24, 25, vi. 6, with 7, and this with 11, 12, 13. To introduce a 
theory of various original documents, in the hope of explain- 
ing such phenomena, would be preposterous. 

(52.) As the country in which the immediate descendants 
of Noah lived, could not have been remote from the place in 
which the ark rested, the wanderers referred to must have 
come from the north, in order to arrive at the plains of 
Babylonia. The opinion of Shuckford, Vol. I. p. 88 ss., 
that the ark had floated over to the confines of China, that 
Noah is identical with Fohi, and that this party had come 
literally from the extreme east, is encumbered by difficulties, 
not the least of which is the impracticability of traversing 
so extensive a region of country at so early a period after 
the flood. Bochart (Lib. i. cap. vii. p. 31,; conjectures that 
the sacred writer follows the usage of the Assyrians, and 
applies the term ' east' to all the region lying beyond the 
Tigris, without particular reference to its geographical posi- 
tion. That on the opposite side of the river would of course 
be named the west. This supposition is now generally 
adopted by interpreters, and it frees the text from embar- 
rassment. 

(53.) Le Clerc conjectures that the true reading in v. 4, is 
E& instead of dtf, and that it expresses the idea of a me- 
tropolis. But any alteration of the text is unnecessary and 
without authority. Some have supposed dtf to mean a 
conspicuous sign, raised with a view to guide shepherds. 
Dathe adopts this view. To the ordinary interpretation he 
objects, that reputation with posterity would not prevent the 
dispersion of these people. But the text does not limit the 
wished-for renown to posterity ; and the distinguished char- 
acter and fame which they hoped to establish by building 



232 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part v. 

the city and tower, might reasonably be expected to attract 
others to their community, and to strengthen the bonds of 
mutual union. — It has been said, that the very great elevation 
of the tower was designed for astronomical observations ; 
but this is mere conjecture, hardly consistent with the state 
of the people referred to, and the very early period of their 
existence. Besides a mountainous region would seem better 
adapted to such a purpose than a plain. 

(54.) The first verse literally translated runs thus : * and 
the whole earth was lip one and words one.' The former 
term lip, fiStp, is sometimes used by a metonymy for lan- 
guage, as in Isa. xix. 18 : "In that day shall five cities in the 
land of Canaan speak the language of Canaan. 1?55 Fl&tD" ; 
and xxxiii. 19: "a people of deeper speech, FlSiB, than thou 
canst perceive," meaning probably, a foreign, unknown dia- 
lect. — But it is also employed in the sense of speech, dis- 
course, in reference to its nature and character, without regard 
to its linguistic peculiarities ; as in Prov. xiv. 7 : " Go from 
the presence of a foolish man, when thou perceivest not in 
him the lips of knowledge, FlSH^flSip," that is, 'wise and 
sensible discourse.' Kindred words, such as mouth and 
tongue, are also used in this latter sense. In 1 Kings xxii. 
13, and 2 Chron. xviii. 12, we find the very similar phrase 
1 one mouth,' '"IPT^ SlS, denoting unanimity, "with one ac- 
cord," as the same Hebrew expression is well rendered in 
our version of Josh. ix. 2, in accordance with the Septuagint 
a^oi vravrsft and the Vulgate, uno animo: "They gathered 
themselves together to fight with Joshua and with Israel, with 
one accord, ^H^ 5l|." And in Zeph. iii. 9, the very word 
1 lip/ tlSiU, is used in connexion with expressions of unani- 
mity. " For then will I turn to the people a pure language, 
HVnS nSfe, that they may all call upon the name of the 



CHAP. X. 1— XI. 9.] NOTES TO GENESIS; 23$ 

Lord, to serve him with one consent. So also in Ps. Iv. 10^ 
" divide their tongues" dpitfb, is equivalent to, ' spread con- 
fusion among them and ruin their counsels.' The same 
figurative use of such words is common in all languages. 
Hence Virgil says, unoque omnes eadem ore fremebant 
iEn. xi. 132. — Vitringa, in his dissertation on the confusion 
of languages, which may be found in his Observationes 
Sacrse, (Lib. I. cap. i — ix. p. 1 — 124, particularly cap. ix* 
p. 109 ss.) supposes, that the whole of this verse merely ex- 
presses the idea of unity of mind respecting the intended 
object, and by the confusion afterwards related, he under- 
stands the dissensions which arose and led to the dispersion. 
It would seem that the bare fact of confounding the one 
original language, thereby introducing several distinct dia- 
lects, would not be necessarily attended by an abandonment 
. of the scheme and the dispersion of its projectors. The 
surprise and consternation which would be occasioned, might 
gradually yield, as the alarmed builders ascertained that 
some of their number could still hold intercourse with others ; 
and thus the work might advance, though slowly and not 
without its peculiar difficulties. The possibility of this, 
however, by no means encourages a belief that such would 
be the result. Without vastly more of philosophy than falls 
to the lot of bodies of men in any age, a confusion of lan- 
guage would be likely to lead to a want of harmony, quite 
incompatible with a successful termination of such an en- 
terprise as that under consideration. And that the text does 
assert a confusion of language and not merely of design, 
(however true it may be that this did take place as a conse- 
quence of the other,) is plain from the general character of 
the expressions in the first and ninth verses, where the unity 
and confusion spoken of are represented as co-extensive 
with the whole habitable earth. The context affords no 
ground whatever for limiting their application. To whie*i 
30 



234 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part v. 

may be added the remark of Perizonius quoted by Rosen- 
miiller, that, inasmuch as the sacred writer had in the pre- 
vious chapter frequently mentioned the distribution of Noah's 
posterity, according to their families, countries, and lan- 
guages, intending now to explain the occasion of such a 
distribution, he premises the very natural observation, that 
before this event mankind all used one common tongue. 

How many languages were formed in consequence of the 
confusion here related, it is impossible to say. The Jewish 
notion ©f seventy, and that of seventy-two maintained by 
many of the Greek and Latin fathers, are alike unsupported 
by any solid argument. The reader will find all that is 
necessary to know on this subject in Bochart's Phaleg, Lib. I. 
cap. xv., de confusione linguarum. 

The dispersion of these builders in consequence of the 
confusion of the one original tongue, would necessarily lead 
to a still wider diversity of languages, which is the ordinary 
result of diversity of climate, condition, and association. 
But to ascribe all varieties of human speech to these and 
other natural causes, is inconsistent with the plain declara- 
tion of the inspired narrative, which not only asserts a con- 
fusion of language, but declares it to have been effected on 
this particular occasion, and in the particular place here 
specified. The seventh and ninth verses clearly prove this 
point. The former expresses the divine determination to 
produce the confusion " there" and the latter informs us, 
that " the Lord did there" accomplish it. The dispersion is 
evidently the result of this confusion, not this confusion the 
result of the dispersion simply. 

Before concluding this note, I cannot help noting the 
contemptuous and indecent manner in which Berger, in the 
work before referred to, speaks of this narrative. Although 
he considers the whole idea of a confusion of language as a 
chimerical notion, philosophically speaking an impossibility, 



CHAP. x. 1— XI. 9.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 235 

he feels no difficulty in allowing that such a confusion is 
here asserted to have taken place. " The old world had no 
hesitation in extending their representations of the power of 
God beyond the bounds of absolute possibility. If it were 
required to recall the past day, to make a real transaction 
not to have been done, or to exhibit a four-cornered circle, 
they would not have scrupled to ascribe this to the divinity ;" 
Vol. I. p. 114. Like many other representations of this 
writer, this statement and the application which he makes of 
it are characterized by a flippancy which might well enough 
become an infidel sneerer, but is very little consistent with 
the gravity of a philosophical inquirer, to say nothing of the 
seriousness required of one who professes to write an Intro- 
duction, pointing out the moral and practical bearing of the 
Old Testament. What shall be said of the candor or dis- 
crimination of an author, who represents Abraham as found- 
ing a system, injurious to the intellectual cultivation of his 
posterity, and making their conversion to Christianity ex- 
tremely difficult! p. 139. 

(55.) The derivation of Babel (whence Babylon,) from 
bbll to confound, is plainly asserted in the ninth verse. 
There appears to be an elision of a b, b5£ being put for 
bj^ln, like fA^oI^ gogultho for ] Ala^^ golgultho. See 
Bochart, Lib. I. cap. xv. ad fin. p. 61. Gesenius compares the 
form of the word with ftStpito for JlSpStp. — Eusebius, in 
his Evangelical Preparation, has preserved fragments re- 
lating to the city and tower, collected from the works of 
Abydenus and Eupolemus. See Lib. IX. cap. xiv. xvii. p. 416, 
418, edit. Colon. 1688. They are inserted by Rosenmiiller at 
the end of his note on v. 9, and, along with other authorities, 
by Bochart, cap. xiii. 



236 



NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part vi, 



Part VI. Chap. xi. 10—26. 

(56.) General view of the discrepancies of the Hebrew, 
Samaritan, and Septuagint chronology, and also that of 
Josephus, until the birth of Abraham, from Jahn's Hebrew 
Bible, p. 25. 





Before Paternity. 


After Paternity. 


Total. 


Heb. 

100 

35 

30 
34 

30 


Sam. 
100 
135 

130 
134 

130 


Sept. 

100 
135 

130 
130 
134 

130 


Jos. 

112 
135 

130 
134 

130 


Heb. 
500 
403 

403 


Sam. 

500 
303 

303 


Sept. 

500 

400 
430 

330 

330 




Shem 


600 


Arphaxad 


438 


Cainan 




Salah 


433 


Eber. ..... 


430 

209 


270 
109 


270 

370 

209 


464 


Phaleg 




Reu. ...... 


32 

30 
29 


132 
130 

79 


132 
130 

179 

79 


130 
132 
120 


207 


107 


207 




Serug 


200 


100 


200 




Nahor. ..... 


119 


69 


125 
129 




Terah 


70 


70 


170 


70 











Between the names of Arphaxad and Salah, the Septua^ 
gint introduces that of Cainan. But this is no doubt an in- 
terpolation, It is unsupported by any other ancient version s 
and is not found in the Hebrew text. The internal evidence 
is also against it, for the age of this supposititious Cainan is the 
same with that of Salah, both before and after their paternity 



CHAP. XI. 10—26.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 237 

is mentioned ; each is one hundred and thirty years before, 
and each lives three hundred and thirty after, which is an 
exceedingly improbable coincidence. That St. Luke men- 
tions Cainan in hi. 36, only shows that his genealogical list 
followed the Septuagint. See Planck's Introduction to 
Sacred Philology and Interpretation, translated from the ori- 
ginal German, and enlarged with notes, by the author of this 
work, Note, XLI. p. 278, 279. Bochart, however, denies 
this, and takes some pains to sustain the conjecture of Cor- 
nelius a Lapide, that the Septuagint was altered in order to 
accommodate it to the copies of the Gospel, into which he 
thinks the error had first crept. See his learned examina- 
tion of the subject, Lib. II. cap. xiii. p. 89 — 91. The ad- 
mission of this principle would involve the critic in difficulties 
arising out of other similar discrepancies. 

Part VII. Chap. xi. 27— xxv. 11. 

(57.) In v. 31, the English translation is, "and they went 
forth with them." This is the true sense of the Hebrew. 
There is no necessity, with Dathe, to follow the Samaritan 
Pentateuch, and the Syriac, Septuagint, and Vulgate ver- 
sions, all of which read in the singular, ' he went out with 
them,' or, ' he brought them out.' The Chaldee Targum 
agrees with the Hebrew text. The meaning may be, that 
Terah and Abraham went with Lot and Sarah, agreeably 
to the opinion of Rashi, which is approved by Rosenmiiller. 
Or, it may intimate that other inhabitants of Ur accompanied 
the party here named. May it not be true that Nahor went 
with his brother Abram? The narrative does not indeed 
expressly mention such removal, and yet we find that Abra- 
ham's servant, who is sent to Mesopotamia to procure a wife 
for Isaac, goes "to the eity of Nahor," (xxiv. 10,) the residence 
of Rebecca, (v. 15,) and of course of her brother Labaru 



238 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part VII. 

But Laban's dwelling-place was Haran, as is evident from 
xxvii. 43, xxviii. 10, xxix. 4. I conclude, therefore, that this 
branch of the patriarchal family had removed from Ur to 
Haran ; and I am not aware of any scriptural statement 
which forbids the supposition, that the removal was contem- 
poraneous with that of Abraham. 

(58.) According to the Hebrew text, Terah lived two 
hundred and five years, and this reading is supported by all 
the ancient versions. But the Samaritan text reads one 
hundred and forty-five. And this seems to be preferable : for, 
by comparing Gen. xi. 26, with xii. 4, it appears, that if Abra- 
ham were the eldest son, he left Haran one hundred and 
forty-five years after his father's birth. If Terah lived 
two hundred and five years, he must have survived this re- 
moval sixty years. In this case we must suppose him to 
have been left in Haran, as the text tells us he died there. 
But such a supposition is wholly incredible, and is expressly 
contradicted by St. Stephen in Acts vii. 4, who states, that 
Abraham's removal was subsequently to his father's decease ; 
and it is evident that it must have taken place shortly after 
that event. If we adopt the Samaritan reading, all is clear 
and probable. It is defended by Bochart, Vol. I. p. 863, 
864, who conjectures, that the error in the Hebrew may 
have arisen from the similarity of the letters p (100), and fa 
(40), particularly as, in some manuscripts, the lower part of 
the former is cut off. If there be an error, it must have 
arisen at a very early period. This preference of the Sa- 
maritan text would indeed be unnecessary, if we could ad- 
mit, with Dr. Adam Clarke, that Abram was the youngest 
son, born in his father's one hundred and fortieth year. But 
this position is untenable, as it was the ordinary practice to 
mention the eldest son first. See note (51.) Besides, 
from xvii. 17, it appears that Abraham regarded it as a very 
extraordinary circumstance, that a person who had arrived 



chap. xi. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 239 

at the age of one hundred should become a parent, which is 
altogether irreconcilable with the opinion that his father was 
one hundred and forty at the time of his birth. A com- 
parison of Rom. iv. 19, and Heb. xi. 11, 12, will confirm 
this argument. 

(59.) The English version of the phrase ftiTV) Ift^l 
" now the Lord had said," is remarkable. It is usually ren- 
dered, 'and the Lord said.' The translators were probably 
led to prefer the pluperfect tense, from the impression that 
this is the same call as that mentioned in Acts vii. 2, 3, where 
the language agrees. This is the view of Rosenmiiller, who 
considers the previous notice of Terah's death as prolepti- 
cal. But the connexion of the narrative makes it plain, that 
the command here given relates to the departure from Ha- 
ran. The first verse contains this command ; in the second 
and third the promise is made; the fourth and fifth mention 
the departure itself, a departure from Haran, and in com- 
pliance with the divine direction. That St. Stephen has 
employed the same language to express the original call 
from Ur of the Chaldees, only proves its applicability to 
either. If it be objected, that the terms, " from thy kindred 
and from thy father's house," would be inapplicable after his 
father's death, it is easy to reply, that they are at least as 
much so after as before, on the supposition of his father's 
accompanying him. Rosenmiiller, indeed, objects to Le 
Clerc, who understands Haran by the expression "thy 
country," that with the Hebrews the land of any one means 
his native country, which in this case was of course Chal- 
dea. No doubt it ordinarily does, as it does also in all lan- 
guages. But any place in which a person resides for a 
considerable time, is said to be his country, as in Matt. ix. 1, 
Capernaum is called our Lord's own city. Comp. iv. 13. 
Thus too Virgil, Mneid III. 297, speaks of Andromache's 



240 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part VII. 



having married a husband of her country in the Trojan 
prince Helenus, although Troy was only her residence, 
her native place being Thebes. Other examples might easily 
be adduced. The terms employed in the passage under 
consideration seem intended to express the complete dissolu- 
tion of all connexion with the land in which Abram dwelt, 
entire abandonment of all his local associations, with the 
view of forming others wholly different. It is highly pro- 
bable, that the original command of God to Abram so par- 
ticularly mentioned by St. Stephen, was repeated to him in 
Haran very soon after the dissolution of his father. 

(60.) This promise is several times repeated. See xviii. 
18, xxii. 18, xxvi. 4, and xxviii. 14. In the first and last in- 
stances, as also in the text, the Niphal conjugation is used ; 
in the other two the Hithpael. The result however is the 
same, the former being taken in its ordinary passive sense, 
and the latter retaining its usual reflexive meaning : ' shall 
consider themselves blessed, shall congratulate themselves.' 
The gloss of Rashi, which Le Clerc has adopted, is this : 
* by thee all nations shall bless.' But, as Rosenmiiller re- 
marks, this would require the Hithpael, as in Deut. xxix. 18, 
(19,) " Tp.^frn, he shall bless himself in his heart." Besides, 
it is irreconcilable with the phraseology " through thy seed," 
which is used in three of the five instances. This is ex- 
planatory of the other phrase " through thee." Both relate 
to Abram's spiritual progeny, and principally to his most 
distinguished descendant, Christ. See the application of 
this promise, Gal. iii. 8, 9, 14, 16, 29, Acts iii. 25, 26. On 
this prophecy, compare Hengstenberg, ubi sup. p. 46 ss. 

(61.) The remark at the end of the seventh verse: 
" and the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the 
land," has been supposed to be an interpolation. But evn 



chap. XI. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 24l 

dently without any ground. Its external authority is not 
disputed, and the internal evidence in its favor is strong. No 
remark could have been more apposite, as the vicinity of 
these people, who could not have been friendly to the new 
comers, must have made intestine divisions particularly dan- 
gerous. Besides, it intimates to the reader, that the level 
pasture grounds being already considerably occupied by the 
Perizzites (comp. Gesenius under the words ''T.'ll) and ^TlS, 
and Hengstenberg's Authentic des Pentateuches, II. p. 186.) 
the remaining portions were insufficient for two such com- 
panies as those of Lot and Abraham. Here it may be well 
to remark, that the same statement, which the sacred author 
has also made in xii. 6, is undoubtedly genuine ; for as the 
last mentioned writer has observed, p. 185, it is in close 
connexion with the promise contained in the seventh verse, 
and illustrates the patriarch's faith, who believed that 
God would give that land to his posterity, although the 
Canaanite was then its occupant. 

The last clause of the tenth verse, " as thou comest unto 
Zoar," is connected with the former part, the words, " before 
the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden 
of the Lord, like the land of Egypt," being parenthetical. This 
construction has been overlooked by the Syriac translator, 
who has taken it in immediate connexion with " the land of 
Egypt," and read Zoan. All the other ancient versions 
agree with the Hebrew. The comparison with " the garden 
of Eden," occurs also in Joel ii. 3. 

Some writers have advanced the opinion, that, before the 
destruction of Sodom and its sister cities, and the consequent 
formation of the Dead Sea, the river Jordan pursued a south- 
erly course along the desert, and found its way into the eastern 
branch of the Red Sea. Burckhardt, who travelled this route 
to Egypt, gives a description of the ground, which coincides 
3J 



242 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vii. 

exactly with such a supposition. The reader will doubtless 
wish to see the statement of this distinguished traveller. 

" The valley of the Ghor, which has a rapid slope south- 
ward, from the lake of Tiberias to the Dead Sea, appears to 
continue descending from the southern extremity of the latter 
as far as the Red Sea, for the mountains on the east of it 
appear to increase in height the farther we proceed south- 
ward, while the upper plain apparently continues upon the 
same level. This plain terminates to the south near Akaba, 
on the Syrian Hadj [pilgrim] route, by a steep rocky des- 
cent, at the bottom of which begins the desert of Nedjed, 
covered, for the greater part, with flints. The same des- 
cent, or cliff, continues westward towards Akaba on the 
Egyptian Hadj road, when it joins the Djebel Hesma, (a 
prolongation of Shera,) about eight hours to the north of 
the Red Sea." 

" The Wady Gharendal empties itself into the valley El 
Araba, in whose sands its waters are lost. This valley is a 
continuation of the Ghor, which may be said to extend from 
the Red Sea to the sources of the Jordan. The valley of 
that river widens about Jericho, and its inclosing hills are 
united to a chain of mountains which open and enclose the 
Dead Sea. At the southern extremity of the sea, they again 
approach, and leave between them a valley similar to the 
northern Ghor in shape, but which the want of water makes 
a desert, while the Jordan and its numerous tributary streams 
render the other a fertile plain. — The general direction of 
the southern Ghor is parallel to the road which I took in 
coming from Khanzyre to Wady Mousa. At the point 
where we crossed it near Gharendal, its direction was from 
N.N.E. to S.S.W. From Gharendal it extends southward 
for fifteen or twenty hours, till it joins the sandy plain which 
separates the mountains of Hesma from the eastern branch 
of the Red Sea. It continues to bear the appellation of El 



CHAP. XI. 27— XXV. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 243 

Ghor as far as the latitude of Beszeyra, to the south of 
which place, as the Arabs informed me, it is interrupted for 
a short space by rocky ground and wadys, and takes the 
name of Araba, which it retains till its termination near the 
Red Sea." Travels in Syria and the Holy Land, by the 
late John Lewis Burckhardt. London, 4to. 1822, p. 435, and 
441, 442. 

Professor Robinson, however, whose views on geographi- 
cal points connected with Palestine and Arabia are entitled 
to the very highest respect, both on account of his general 
accuracy and thoroughness of investigation, and of his hav- 
ing examined the country himself, in company with a Reve- 
rend friend and missionary, declares this opinion to be un- 
tenable. His views may be seen in part in a letter addressed 
to the editor of the Biblical Repository, which appeared in 
the number for January, 1840, p. 24 ss. It is presumed 
that his work on the Geography of Palestine, the publication 
of which may soon be expected, will contain further dis- 
closures on this subject. 

(62.) Hebron is said to have been in the plain, or rather, 
among the oaks, p jb&,) of Mamre, the Amorite. See xiv. 13. 

It would appear from Judges i. 10, that before the age of 
the author of that book, the name of Hebron was Kirjath- 
arba. Hence it has been argued, that the word in Genesis 
is either an interpolation, or that some editor, posterior to 
the time of the author, substituted it in place of the original 
word, which in his day had become obsolete. But on the other 
hand, Hebron may have been the original name of the place, 
and Kirjath-arba a subsequent appellation, which, after the 
conquest of Canaan, gave place to the former. It would 
seem from Gen. xxiii. 2, that when Moses wrote this part of 
the Pentateuch, both names were occasionally used: "Sarah 
died in Kirjath-Arba, the same is Hebron in the land of 



244 NOTES TO GENESIS, [part vn. 

Canaan." It must not be assumed from this place, that 
Kirjath-Arba was the more ancient appellation. As Ar- 
ba was a distinguished man among the Anakim, (Josh. xiv. 
15,) a gigantic race of people very distinguished in the time 
of Moses and Joshua, but not mentioned in the patriarchal 
history, it is probable that Hebron, a very ancient city, 
(Num. xiii. 22,) was rebuilt or fortified or embellished by 
this person, and hence became designated by his name, 
the city (fcV^.p) of Arba. That a city may for a short time 
partially lose it's most ancient name, and afterwards regain 
it, is illustrated in the case of Jerusalem, which for a time 
was called iElia Capitolina, but afterwards assumed its 
ancient appellation. The same remark may apply to what 
is said in Judg. xviii, 29, respecting a place called Dan. See 
Gen. xiv. 14. This may have been its original name, al- 
though for a time it was called Laish or Leshem, the first 
designation being re-applied in memory of the son of Ja- 
cob. Some writers, however, are of the opinion, that there 
were two places of the name of Dan lying in the northern 
part of Palestine, and Hengstenberg supposes the Dan of 
3 Sam. xxiv. 6, to be the one of them, to which the addition 
of Jaan is appended, in order to distinguish .it from the 
Dan- Laish of the book of Judges. Authentie des Pent. II, 
p. 194, 

(63.) El am is certainly a part of Persia, if it does not 
comprehend the whole. From the prominency given in the 
narrative to the king of this country, (see particularly v, 
4, 5, 17,) it has been inferred, that the Elamites, identical 
probably with the Persians, were the most powerful nation 
of Western Asia, since even Canaanitish kings were tribu- 
tary to them. Shinar is the word for Babylonia. What 
country is meant by Ellasar is uncertain. See Gesenius, 
who thinks that " the Assyro-Babylonian name of its king* 



chap. xi. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 245 

Arioch, seems to indicate some province of Persia or Assy- 
ria. Comp. Dan. ii. 14." — The word Q^"b, which is rendered 
" nations," comprehends probably the country lying north- 
east of Gallilee. Comp. Isa. viii. 23, (ix. 1,) " Gallilee of the 



(64.) It is said in v. 7, that " they smote all the country of 
the Amalekites," and, inasmuch as Amalek was a grandson 
of Esau, xxxvi. 12, the introduction of the Amalekites in the 
history of Abraham has been thought to involve a palpable 
contradiction. 

Most commentators, following the authority of Josephus, 
(Ant. Lib. II. cap. 1. § 2,) take it for granted, that the Ama- 
lekites were descended from the Amalek just mentioned, and 
account for the introduction of the name here by supposing 
a prolepsis. Hengstenberg, ubi sup. II. p. 303 ss., has de- 
fended this view. Some very distinguished writers, how- 
ever, among whom may be reckoned Calmet, Le Gere, 
Michaelis, and Bryant,* maintain that the Amalekites were 
a very ancient nation, flourishing long before the age of 
Esau's grandson, and of course wholly independent of him. 
It may be proper to state the principal arguments on both 
sides of this question. 

1. On the one side it is said, that the place of residence 
of the Amalekites is "Mount Seir," the country which was 
occupied by the descendants of Esau. Thus we read in 1 
Chron. iv. 42, 43, that " some of the sons of Simeon went 
to Mount Seir, and smote the Amalekites." The country of 
the Amalekites, therefore, belonged to Idumea. Such a 
coincidence is most readily accounted for on the supposition 
that the Amalekites were a part of the Edomites. 

Undoubtedly this would be the readiest solution, if it in- 

* Analysis of Mythology, vi. 212 ss. 



248 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vii. 

volved no difficulty. But it is by no means a necessary solu- 
tion ; as it is quite conceivable, that the ancient Amalekites may 
have settled in that mountainous region, while the Edomites 
subsequently took possession of such portions as remained 
unoccupied. Incidental circumstances, which history has 
not transmitted to us, may have given rise to a local con- 
nexion between the Edomites and the ancient Amalekites. 

2. Again, it is said to be quite improbable, that a people 
standing in so important a relation to the Israelites, should be 
without any genealogical notice. This is foreign from the 
ordinary usage of the book of Genesis. And it is still more 
improbable, that no intimation should be given in the whole 
work of two distinct and separate races of Amalekites. 

The latter remark assumes the contested point, for the 
language of Gen. xiv. 7, may itself be an intimation of an 
Amalekitish race anterior to the time of Esau ; not to say, 
that other places in the Pentateuch hereafter to be examined 
may strengthen such an opinion. Besides, the descendants 
of Amalek, the grandson of Esau, may have been merged 
among the Edomites in general, just as the posterity of Ja- 
cob's twelve sons are usually designated by the name of 
Israelites ; unless, indeed, they became incorporated with the 
more ancient Amalekites, in consequence of some associa- 
tion or affinity which history has not preserved. The con- 
clusion drawn from the general usage of the book of Genesis 
is unauthorized. Where is the genealogical notice of the 
Chaldees and Perizzites ? In relation to the former, nothing 
can be inferred from the name Chesed in Gen. xxii. 22, and 
the origin of the latter is, I believe, unnoticed. We cannot 
argue from the frequent to the invariable usage of an 
author. 

3. Some force has been attached to the phraseology in 
Gen. xiv. 7, " the country of the Amalekites," not the people 
themselves. Hence it has been supposed that the author in- 



chap. xi. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 247 

tended to designate the region which in his own time was 
occupied by the descendants of Esau's grandson. It would 
not follow that Amalekites resided there in the age of Abra- 
ham, in reference to whom the name will have been used by 
way of anticipation. 

The possibility of this is hardly to be denied. But I think 
it is exceedingly improbable. All the other names in this 
part of the history seem to be those which were in use in 
Abraham's time, and there ought to be strong reasons for 
excepting the term under consideration from the general 
usage. Neither is it very likely that a writer so learned 
and intelligent as the author of the book of Genesis, would 
designate a tract of country in this way, although he might 
proleptically introduce the name of a city or village. Is it 
to be supposed, that a historian of Great Britain would re- 
present an inroad made on the Saxons of England, as an 
attack on a country of the Normans ? The statement of 
this analogous case places the difficulty of the supposition in 
its true light. 

The other view of the subject is thus defended. 

1. The identity of names proves nothing. The grandson 
of Esau may have had the name of Amalek given him 
either from some incidental cause, or on account of the dis. 
tinguished character of the more ancient personage who 
had made it celebrated. 

2. In Num. xxiv. 30, Amalek is called " the first of the 
nations," which certainly implies at the very least great an- 
tiquity. But this, says Hengstenberg. is a misapprehension 
of the true meaning of the words. They must be limited 
by the context, which refers to the hostile attitude assumed 
against Israel. In this sense the Amalekites took precedence,, 
as they were the first of the neighboring tribes to attack the 
Hebrews on their march towards Canaan. See Ex. xviL 
8 — 16. This sense of the place is supported by the Chaldee- 



248 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vil. 

Targum, which paraphrases it thus : " first of the wars 
against Israel, battel ajfilj? 1TP V that is, first of those 
nations who made war upon the Israelites. It appears more 
reasonable, however, to consider the words as expressive, 
not of an insulated fact in their history, but of some well 
known property or characteristic of the nation, its great an- 
tiquity, comprehending also well established strength. This 
is in harmony with what is said in the following verse, which 
describes the impregnable security in which the strongly 
fortified Kenites boasted. The limitation put upon the words 
is indefensible, such an addition to their simple sense being 
wholly unnecessary. 

2. It is further argued, that the opposite conduct which 
the Hebrews were directed to pursue towards the Edomites, 
who were descendants of Esau, and towards the Amalekites, 
proves them to have been distinct races. The former were 
to be treated as brethren ; with the latter they were to 
wage interminable war. See Num. xx. 14—21, Deut. ii. 
4, 5, xxiii. 7 ; with which texts compare Ex. xvii. 8—16, Deut. 
xxv. 17 — 19, and 1 Sam. xv. 2 ss. In reply to this, Hengs- 
tenberg remarks, that good reason can be given for the dif- 
ferent conduct of the Israelites towards the Amalekites and 
the other Edomites. " These, although not friendly to the 
Israelites, had done nothing against them to dissolve a fra- 
ternal connexion as the Amalekites had." But this is evi- 
dently inconsistent w r ith the representation in Num. xx. 18, 
20, 21, where Edom replies to his " brother Israel's" request 
to be permitted merely to "pass through" the country, ''thou 
shalt not pass by me, lest I come out against thee with the 
sword ;" and further still with the fact, that the Edomites did 
actually " come out against the Israelites with much people 
and with a strong hand," and " refused to give Israel passage 
through his border." 

3. The traditionary account of the Arabians is also ap- 



CHAP. XI. 27— XXV. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 249 

pealed to in defence of this view. Their historians repre- 
sent Amalek as the son of Ham, the father of Ad and grand- 
father of Shedad. See Calmet's Dictionary, and D'Her- 
belot's Bibliotheque Orientale under Amlak. 

On the whole, the evidence appears to preponderate in 
favor of the opinion, that the Amalekites were a powerful 
nation existing long before the age of Esau. 

(65.) If as many as three hundred and eighteen men ca- 
pable of bearing arms were born in Abram's house, it is evi- 
dent that his domestic establishment could not have con- 
sisted of less than one thousand five hundred or two thousand 
souls. He was therefore a powerful chief; and thus he is 
represented in several places in Genesis. See xii. 5, xiii. 2, 0, 
xxiii. 6, xxiv. 10, 35, 53. 

(66.) There is no contradiction between v. 17 and 10. 
The opinion of Aben Esra, that the kings of Sodom and 
Gomorrah threw themselves into some of the pits for the 
purpose of concealment, is unnecessary ; neither is it sup- 
ported by the ordinary sense of the word bSJ. The most 
probable meaning is, that they and their men fled to this 
valley, where some were destroyed, and others escaped to 
the mountain region. The king of Sodom was fortunately 
among the latter number. 

(67.) All historical knowledge respecting Melchisedek that 
can be relied on is contained in this very brief account. 
Nothing more is known of him except that he was king of 
a place called Salem,* which was probably situated on the 

* Some have identified this place with Jerusalem, but without any 
satisfactory proof. Jerusalem is indeed called Salem, (Ps. lxxvi. 2,) 
by a contraction probably ; but the historical circumstances here men- 
tioned, render it most probable that Salem was considerably north of 
32 



250 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vii. 

west of the Jordan between the lake of Gennesaret and the 
Dead Sea, and that he was a priest of Jehovah ; thus uniting 
in his person, agreeably to ancient usage, the royal and 
sacerdotal characters. The peculiarity of the " order" or 
rank of his priesthood, and the analogy which it bore to the 
priestly office of Christ, are points of Christian doctrine, but 
not connected with the history of Abram. See Ps. ex. 4, 
and Heb. vii. 

The dignity of this distinguished personage is well argued 
in the chapter last referred to. But the opinion advanced 
by some of the old Romanists, and lately also by Dr. Hale, 
ubi sup. Vol. I. p. 128, that the " bread and wine" which he 
is here said to have brought to Abram, v. 18, were em- 
blematic of the eucharistic elements, is utterly unfounded. 
The natural result of such extravagant representations is to 
lessen the reader's respect for scripture and for the judg- 
ment of the author. Every one knows that the term 'bread* 
is used by the Hebrews for food in general, and wine was 
useful to restore the exhausted energies of Abram's party. 
A refutation of this unfounded notion, against the alleged 
arguments of Natalis Alexander, may be found in Buddaeus, 
ubi sup. p. 268—270. 

(68.) Whether TlblJl, v. 2, refers to his course of life, as 
if he had said, * I am passing my time,' or' his advanced age, 
and the probability of his passing away from the present 
scene, is doubtful. The Septuagint often translates it by 
words expressive of dying. Here it uses a^oXv o/xou, in Ps. 
xxxix. 13, (14,) atfyik&siv, and in lviii. 8, (9,) avrava^s^tfovrou. — 

Jerusalem. Certainty on such a point is unattainable. The passage in 
2 Sam. xviii. 18, "Absalom had reared up a pillar, which is in the 
king's dale," throws no light on the geographical situation of the place ; 
because the locality of " the king's dale" cannot be determined. Tb 
assume that it lay near Jerusalem, is to beg the point in question,- 



CHAP. XI. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 251 

Most of the old versions and commentators explain pP£~^!2 
as a Hebraism for " steward ;" either from p^ti) or ppti? 
to run about, expressive of activity, diligence, supervision, 
or from the Arabic ( jLLc, to comb, trim, polish, keep in or- 
der, according to the office of a superintendent. A few 
consider ptpfa as a proper name. It is evidently a parono- 
masia with what follows Pip^n, and may be used, as Gese- 
nius thinks, for tltM possession, which is probably its mean- 
ing in Job xxviii. 18. The phrase will thus be a Hebraism 
for ' possessor,' and convey the idea expressed in the Ana- 
lysis. For a full view of the ancient authorities on this pas- 
sage, the reader may consult Rosenmuller's note. 

(69.) It is not probable that Abram's faith, from which his 
justification resulted, is mentioned here as a part of the 
vision ; although it is barely possible, and might be so re- 
presented, as an intimation of the fixed habit of his mind ; 
as in the case of Solomon's asking for wisdom in a dream. 
See 1 Kings iii. 5 ss. If the account of what took place in 
the vision extended, as Rosenmiiller thinks, to the ninth verse 
inclusive, the sixth should be regarded as parenthetical. 
The fifth is easily explained ; as the Lord may be said to 
have brought Abram out and showed him the stars, although 
no corporeal action took place, but all was represented to 
the mind. The language of Maimonides* illustrates this 
remark, flab "jbn I^DE 'DlbnS tHK fi&Ttt 1&3 

i&ipi ']H il ibi^i "pT i&n 'm»» dtn ai^i 'rnnbsn 
ib&n nainsn ^btEfr ip 'mma nfr i^*& mm *oibs 
nna * * * * 'im na-insn nan^n tWT ia i»t ntDa 
n-wnb psin ab nai^n nariM mn bsnra mra 

* More Nevochim, Part II. chap. 46, fol. 70, Berlin edition, 1795, 
and in Buxtorf's translation, p. 322. 



252 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[PART VII. 



* 



'ftetfow timim, ^n^ffl b^n ip pbm pbn to n-orn 
n&nb pwi abi iba 'n nfran a^n nft^rc i^ 

J dlbni <TTO " As in a dream," says this learned and ju- 
dicious Rabbi, " a man may seem to himself to go to a cer- 
tain country, to marry a wife, and spend a considerable time 
there, to have a son by her called by some particular name, 
and of whom this and that may be said ; so is it also in pro- 
phetic vision. Actions and things which the prophet is 
said to do, space of time intervening between different ac- 
tions, removal from one place to another ; all these are done in 
prophetic vision, and are not to be considered as realand sen- 
sible actions, however minutely they may be specified. To 
state that any particular part of a communication was made 
in prophetic vision, would have been unnecessary, because 
it was well known that the whole took place in that way." 
It is indeed possible, that the first communication may end 
with the fourth verse, and another be comprehended in 
7 — 9, and again a third begin with v. 12. But this is, to 
say the least, unnecessary ; and it is not probable, as the 
second communication would be introduced abruptly, with- 
out any notice of the manner, while the first is mentioned as 
taking place "in a vision," and the last is made after "a deep 
sleep and horror had fallen on Abram." The mental agony 
which he suffered, may have been occasioned in part by agi- 
tating reflections on his situation and prospects ; but, in all 
probability, it was caused in a much greater degree by natural 
inability to bear divine communications without being deeply 
.and distressingly affected. Comp. Dan. viii. 27, x. 16 ss. 

(70.) In Gen. xv. 13, it is said: "they shall come out with 
great substance." The particularity of the prediction is 
remarkable. Compare the language of Ex. hi. 21, 22: "I 
will give this people favor in the sight of the Egyptians, and 
|t shall conie to pass, that, when ye go, ye shall not go 



CHIP. XI. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 253 

empty. But every woman shall borrow (ask) of her neigh- 
bor, and of her that sojourneth in her house, jewels of silver 
and jewels of gold and raiment ; and ye shall spoil the 
Egyptians." Add xi. 2, 3, and xii. 35, 36. 

(71.) The emblems of affliction and almighty protection 
passing between the pieces indicates a covenant on the part 
of God with Abram, comprising the promise of deliverance 
from the predicted calamity. By this symbolical rite, co- 
venants were anciently ratified. Why this emblematic re- 
ference of the furnace and lamp to the predicted servitude 
and deliverance, should be regarded as out of place in con* 
sequence of a covenant being thus indicated, (as Rosenmiiller 
suggests,) I am unable to see. 

(72.) Vossius, in his work on idolatry, Lib. II. cap. 74, 
p. 690 — 691, explains the phrase, "river of Egypt," of the 
Nile ; not understanding, however its main stream, but a 
branch running from the Pelusiac channel towards Palestine, 
and falling into the Mediterranean, or (as he calls it,) the 
Egyptian or Phoenician sea, near the southern boundary of 
that country : " rivum ex brachio Pelusiaco Judseam versus 
procurrentem, indeque profluentem in mare iEgyptium, sive 
Phoenicium." But the opposition between the ' river of 
Egypt and the Euphrates, shows that the main stream itself 
is meant. The prominence of this river accounts for its 
being selected to mark out the extreme limit of the promised 
land on the one side, as the well known Euphrates does on 
the other. That the Hebrews never possessed the portion 
of Egypt which lies east of the Nile is no serious difficulty. 
Nice geographical accuracy is not intended. Comp. Ex. 
xxiii. 31. The substitution of Egypt in the Analysis for the 
river of Egypt is in accordance with 2 Chron. ix. 26 : " he 
reigned from the river even unto the land of the Philistines, 



254 NOTES TO GENESIS. 

and to the border of Egypt." Between this country and 
that occupied by the Hebrews, nothing intervened but a 
small portion of unimportant desert. 

(73.) See Sale's Preliminary Discourse, prefixed to his 
translation of the Koran, Sect. I. p. 11, London edition, 1836. 
Also Discourses on Prophecy, by John Davison, B. D. third 
edition, Oxford, 1834, p. 490 — 493. As the remarks of this 
writer are particularly worthy of attention, it may be well 
to lay them before the reader. 

" The publication [announcement] of this prophecy (res- 
pecting Ishmael) is ascribed to the time of Abraham ; it is 
said to have been given before the birth of Ishmael, who 
was to be the progenitor and founder of this future nation ; 
of which nation we must in reason understand what is here 
foretold : " he shall be a wild man, and his hand shall be 
against every man, and every man's hand against him ;" 
since such a state of general hostility could hardly attach to 
an individual, except as the representative of his progeny or 
nation. But, since the date of this remote prophecy rests 
upon the word of Moses in the Pentateuch, we cannot assume 
that this particular, respecting its time of publication, is 
true ; and though the faith and veracity of the sacred historian 
have been often effectually vindicated, that is a previous or 
collateral topic, from which our present examination shall 
borrow nothing. Suppose then that the public knowledge 
of the prophecy was only contemporary with the Pentateuch 
itself. The Pentateuch, containing the public code and 
solemn annals of the Jewish people, could not be put forth 
surreptitiously, nor in any other age than that which it bears 
upon the face of it.; the age of Moses its author. At that 
time, if not before, the prophecy was extant. 

At that time, then, we shall have a prediction delineating, 
.under a brief, but expressive description, the genius and 



CHAP.XI.27-XXV.il.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 255 

manners of a people who have always been reckoned a very 
singular race, and that description, in all its brevity, marking 
the very habits of life by which this race has been distin- 
guished from the rest of the world. " He will be a wild 
man ; and his hand will be against every man, and every 
man's hand against him. And he shall dwell in the presence 
of all his brethren." If we call for the report of the his- 
torians and travellers of every age, they will inform us that 
we have here the very character of the Arabian. They 
will tell us of his roving habits ; of the desultory career of 
his rude freedom, which has neither been subdued by con- 
quest, nor reclaimed by the milder restraints of settle- 
ment and civilization. They will tell us also of the license 
of his predatory warfare and the state of defiance and 
hostility which forms the international law between him and 
those around him. There appears therefore, in this instance, 
to have been an exact and remarkable accomplishment of 
this aboriginal prophecy concerning the Arabian race. 

Will it be said, however, that so soon as in the time of 
Moses, to which, for the sake of argument, I have consented 
to refer the publication of the prophecy, the Ishmaelite then 
was what he since has always been, and that the subsisting 
picture of his national manners was converted into the 
semblance of a prediction? History is too imperfect for us 
to sift the allegation. If we admit the prophecy to have 
been a real one, we may easily believe that the people who 
were the subject of it soon began to verify it. But since, 
apart from the prophecy, we know nothing of them in this 
respect, let us consider what is probable. Now I think it 
will be granted that the imperfect settlement of the world*, 
and the general rude state of nations at that time, render it 
highly improbable that any such deep appropriate marks 
could have begun to distinguish the Arabian, as would ar- 
rest the attention of a common historian, and enable him to 



256 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part VH. 

select and seize so truly, the one example of those peculiar 
national habits which was ultimately to survive and exceed 
the rest There were too many wild men then, to make one 
instance of it in a race a rare one. Too much of promis- 
cuous rapine and violence, to give a single people the pri- 
vilege of a reputation on such accounts. 

But one certainty we have, that is, the long continued 
fulfilment of this prophecy. The Arabians have occupied 
one and the same country. They have roved, like the 
moving sands of their deserts ; but their race has been 
rooted whilst the individual has wandered. That race has 
neither been dissipated by conquest, nor lost by migration, 
nor confounded with the blood of other countries. They 
have continued to dwell " in the presence of all their breth- 
ren," a distinct national family, wearing, upon the whole, the 
same features and aspect which prophecy first impressed 
upon them. The wildness which is incident only to a cer- 
tain stage of man's social nature, has been permanent with 
them; and, although they have been compacted and em- 
bodied as a nation for more than three thousand years, they 
have resisted those changes of habit which it is the effect 
of civil union, so long continued, to induce. Plainly, there 
is something unusual and remarkable in their case. And 
yet the account which could now be given of them, with all 
the advantage of knowing their whole past history, is no 
other than was given of them long ago, in the first rudi- 
ments of their national existence, if we take the prophecy 
at the lowest supposable date of it, and before they existed 
at all, if we rely upon the only direct testimony which we 
possess, and that an unimpeached one, as to the real time of 
its publication." 

(74.) The phrase ^53~b?, rendered in our version, " in 
the presence of," means 'on the east of/ In describing 



chap. xi. 27 xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 257 

places, the Hebrews face the east. Hence, IJS"^?, literally 
' on the face of,' refers to the region which is towards the 
face, in other words, the east. And so it is used in other 
places. See xxiii. 17, 19, ^^3 ^$~b? 'east of Manure/ 
xxv. 9, and especially 18. In this last passage, ^$~b$ 
b|5 T 1 )!^ - ^, the English translation is : " and he died in 
the presence of all his brethren." But, not to urge the ex- 
traordinary sense which this implies, (Ishmael's dying in the 
presence of the other children of his father.) it is contrary 
to usage. j§5j which properly means ' to fall/ is not em- 
ployed in the sense of dying, except in reference to violent 
death, when its use is agreeable to analogy. The transla- 
tion ought to be, 'it fell on the east of his brethren/ and the 
clause is evidently elliptical, meaning, ' the lot fell/ that is, 

* their country lay on the east of Palestine.' So the Septua- 
gint, xarwxTjtfs. In Josh. xiii. 6, H2S0 is correctly rendered 
in our translation, " divide thou it by lot ;" literally, ' cause 
it to fall.' The death of Ishmael is mentioned in v. 17, and 
is succeeded by a geographical description of the region in 
which his posterity lived. Thus the Arabians are called 

* sons of the east/ and the Arabian magi are said to come 
from the east. See Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho, 
Part II. Grabe's edition, p. 304. Geographical terms are 
frequently employed in scripture with some degree of lati- 
tude. The descendants of Ishmael were settled partly east 
and partly south-east of the Hebrews, the latter direction 
being comprehended under the more general term. 

Since writing the above, I have met with the work of the 
Rev. Charles Foster, B. D., entitled " Mahometanism 
Unveiled," London, 1829, 2 vols. 8vo. It is extraordinary 
that so sensible a writer should have founded an important 
part of his theory on an interpretation which is, at least, 
of doubtful authority. He considers the expression, 'in 
33 



258 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part VII. 

the presence of/ as implying contiguity of situation, and " a 
posture of hostility," " hostile contact and collision." The 
character of hostility is indeed explicitly stated in the former 
part of the twelfth verse ; but it is by no means implied in 
the words under consideration, which simply refer to geo- 
graphical situation. This learned author, however, not 
satisfied with an interpretation, which makes the " Ishmael- 
itish Arabs stretch themselves along the entire frontier of 
Canaan, from the Euphrates to the Red Sea," thinks 
that he finds in this simple geographical designation a 
prophecy to this effect, that the descendants of Ishmaei 
should not only " exercise an implacable and unremitting 
hostility against the offspring of Isaac, their brethren, in im- 
mediate contact with whom they were at first planted by 
the hand of Providence," but that this " prophetic conflict" 
was in subsequent ages to be "renewed," when the Jews and 
Mohammedans should meet in the remotest countries of the 
world. Vol. I. p. 93, 94, 135. It is unnecessary to show, 
that such views derive no support from the language of the 
text. But it may not be unworthy of remark, as an illus- 
tration of the vagueness of exposition not founded on philo- 
logical examination, that the celebrated Sir Harry Vane, 
Junior, when referring to a law of exclusion passed by the 
early puritans of Massachusetts, against which he objected 
as an act of intolerance, quotes this very language as ex- 
pressive of peaceful and harmonious intercourse ! " Scribes 
and Pharisees, and such as are confirmed in any way of 
error, are not to be denied cohabitation, but are to be pitied 
and reformed. Ishmaei shall dwell in the presence of his 
brethren" See Bancroft's History of the United States, 
Vol. I. p. 390, fifth edition. 

(75.) The English translation of the middle clause of the 



CHAP.XI.27—xxv.]l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 259 

thirteenth verse, " thou God seest me," follows the Septua- 
gint and Vulgate, cO 6 ®sog 6 s^jowv ju- qui vidisti me. This 
version supposes the word ^^l to be a participle from ilNH 
with i as a pronominal suffix. The regular form of the 
participle with the suffix of the first person is ^5$h, or ac- 
cented n 58h, as it occurs in Isa. xlvii. 10, ^ijTl "PSjj * there 
is none that seeth me.* Still there are examples of the use of 
"£0 as a participle with the pronominal suffix. Thus in 
Job vii. 8, ^Sh V2 " the eye of him that hath seen me ;" 
and Ps. xxii. 8, (7,) ^'vblD " all they that see me." Also 
xxxi. 12, (11,) ^1 "they that did see me." It is better, how- 
ever, to consider the word as a noun, of the form of *02 
affliction, and to render the whole phrase thus : ' thou (art) 
the God of sight,' that is, who allowest thyself to be seen. 
I observe, after writing this, that the same view of this 
word is given by Rabbi Solomon of Dubno, in the fiblbd *T\1 
" i&1 bfc, an abstract noun of the form of ^% W, "<5? f 
meaning, thou art the God of seeing (H£"l!$ tTliO b^), who 
appearest to the sons of men." The reason of Hagar's 
applying this name appears from what follows: ' for she said, 
do I indeed here see,' that is, enjoy the use of my senses and 
live, i after my sight,' after having seen the symbol of the 
divine presence ! It is an expression of grateful surprise at 
being permitted to continue in life and health, after the en- 
joyment of a privilege, to which it was the general opinion 
that no one could be admitted and live. Comp. Exod. xx. 
19, Deut. xviii. 16, Jud. vi. 22, 23. The word Wai 
is evidently chosen as a paronomasia with ^JS^I. — The name 
given to the spring is of the same import: Beer-lahai-roi, 
meaning, ' the well of the living, (an epithet usually applied 
to God,) of sight,' that is, of him who allows himself to be 
seen. 



260 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part VII. 

(76.) Abram, compounded of i$ father and d 1 ! high, is 
expressive of dignity. By a very slight change in the latter 
part of the word, it becomes Abraham, meaning, as the con- 
text explains, father of a great multitude. The word which 
forms the latter part of the name no longer exists in the 

Hebrew ; but it is found in the Arabic *l£j, a great num- 
ber. That the name was intended to intimate his spiritual 
relationship of paternity to all the faithful, as well as to de- 
note the immense number of his lineal descendants, we have 
the express testimony of St. Paul. See Rom. iv. 11, 12, 16, 
17, Gal. hi. 7—9, 14, 16, 29. 

(77.) On the authority of Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, 
and Strabo, supported by other evidence, it has been con- 
tended that circumcision originated with the Egyptians, from 
whom it spread to other nations. Among the defenders of 
this view, one of the most distinguished is Spencer, who 
gives the arguments on both sides with fulness and learning, 
in his work De Legibus Hebrseorum, Lib. I. cap. iv. sect. 4. 
Le Clerc, also, in his note on v. 10, suggests that the Egyp- 
tian practice may have given occasion to the divine com- 
mand to Abraham. Von dee Hardt, as quoted by Buddseus, 
ubi sup. Period I. sect. iii. cap. 4, note # * # , p. 277, endea- 
vors to remove the difficulty, by supposing a partial, private, 
and medicinal use of the rite to have existed antecedently to 
the time of Abraham, but not allowing its general use among 
the Egyptians. But such an occasional practice is altogether 
hypothetical. Rosenmuller in loc. cites Jablonskc, saying ? 
that as circumcision, both among the Egyptians and the 
descendants of Abraham, was a religious rite, emblematic 
of purity, it was not regarded as obligatory by the former 
except on the priests and other ecclesiastical persons. If 
this very limited application of the rite were more ancient 



CHAP. xi. 27— xxv. 11. J NOTES TO GEXESI8. 261 

than Abraham's time 3 God may have extended the obligation 
of it to every male, in order to intimate that his people 
ought all to be holy, like priests. Bat the passages quoted 
from the Greek authors above mentioned, say nothing about 
a limited use of this ceremony. The scriptural evidence 
favors the opinion, that the narrative in the text contains the 
history of the origin of circumcision. In defence of this 
view, see Buddaeus, ubi sup. p. 275 — 282. Jer. ix. 25, 26, to 
which Spencer appeals in order to show that the Egyptians 
were a circumcised people, is certainly better adapted to 
prove the contrary. The expression, " all these nations 
are uncircumcised," being in immediate connexion with the 
words, " all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in the 
heart," is a reason for taking it in the literal and most com- 
prehensive sense. See Rosenmiiller on this place, who allows, 
that as a nation the Egyptians were uncircumcised, and the 
Idumseans also until the time of John Hyrcanus. Respect- 
ing the practice of the Ammonites and Moabites w r e have 
no evidence, p. 302, 303. — The declaration of God in Jos. 
v. 9, " I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off 
you," is also appealed to by Spencer, who supposes it to 
imply, that before the time of Joshua, uncircumcision was 
regarded by the Egyptians as disgraceful. But it is clear 
that the language proves nothing on this point. For the 
phrase, " the reproach of Egypt," may as well be explained 
of contempt usually thrown by the Israelites on their Egyp- 
tian oppressors ; who would be selected as the objects of 
this opprobrium, on account of the hatred which their tyran- 
nical conduct would naturally excite. But, probably, the 
text intimates the state of freedom and dignity to which the 
Hebrews are now T considered as advanced, on renewing their 
covenant with Jehovah by means of the instituted rite, and 
immediately on their entrance into the promised land. "The 
reproach of Egypt" will thus comprehend the former dis- 



262' NOTES TO GENESIS. [part VII. 

graceful slavery, the evils, and, indeed, the very memory of 
which may be said to be removed by becoming the Lord's 
privileged freemen. 

(78.) The excision referred to is explained by some of ex- 
communication, by others of banishment. But the opinion 
generally maintained by the Jews, that it relates to some 
punishment inflicted by divine interposition, is best supported. 
See Levit. xvii. 10, xx. 2, 5, 6, xxiii. 30. That divine Pro- 
vidence always interfered to punish the culprit is, by no 
means, a necessary consequence. 

(79.) The various feelings which must have agitated 
Abraham's mind, now of delight, arising out of the exercise 
of full faith, and again of apprehension, springing from even 
the slightest degree of doubt, and prompting the prayer for 
the son already born, may be illustrated by a comparison 
with the representation made in the Gospels of the alterna- 
ting emotions of fear, doubt, and joy, with which the Apos- 
tles received, the evidence of their master's resurrection. 
See Luke xxiv. 34 — 37, and especially v. 41 ; from which 
it appears, that, after they had themselves informed the 
disciples who had just arrived from Emmaus," that the Lord 
had risen," and thus confirmed the account of his appearance 
on the road, immediately on his showing himself they are 
affrighted, and suppose him to be " a spirit," and even on 
further evidence " believe not for joy." Homer expresses 
the same natural feeling, when he represents the Trojans as 
hardly able to believe that their darling Hector has escaped 
in safety after his engagement with Ajax : 

~K.aH I yjyov rfgori atfVu, diXtovrsg tfo'ov gjvai* 

Iliad, vii. 310. 

The note of Madame Dacier, cited with approbation by 



CHAP.xi.27-xxv.il.] NOTES TO GEx\ESIS, 263 

Clarke, conveys the true sentiment : Prse laetitia vix cre- 
dentes verum id esse quod viderent. 

(80.) The language of our English version, both in v. 10 
and 14, "according to the time of life," is not very intelli- 
gible. The Hebrew is Jl^H £l?5, and it occurs also in 
2 Kings iv. 16, 17. Our translators explain ♦T>ft as a noun. 
It seems better, with the greater proportion of good critics, 
to consider it .as an adjective, the feminine of ^PJ living. 
Thus it may apply to Sarah herself, and imply that she 
shall live. But it is much clearer and more beautiful, to re- 
gard it as poetic; literally, ' according to,' (or when) * the 
time' (or season, or year,) ■ is living,' reviving again, return- 
ing. Thus it will denote, as Gesenius thinks, " the reviving 
year, that is, the coming spring, when the winter shall be 
past and nature revives;'' or else, 'this same season next 
year,' as if he had said, ' when this time (of the year) lives 
again.' See xvii. 21, from which it is probable that this 
divine manifestation to Abraham took place not long after 
his submission to the rite of circumcision. 

(81.) The punctuation of the word ^Ol&fc in v. 3, with the 
same vowels as those which are applied to iTl»T, and the 
masoreticai intimation of sanctity expressed by the word 
tJHD in the margin, seem to justify the conclusion, that the 
Rabbins identified the person whom Abraham addresses 
with him, to whom the word nlPP is applied in v. 13, 14, 
17, &c* And probably they were correct in so doing, as 
it seems difficult to make the whole narrative consistent on 
any other supposition. At first Abraham sees three men, to- 

* Compare also the Rabbinical punctuation of ^5^1^ in Judg. vi. 15, 
and see Vitringa's Dissertation, De Angelo Sacerdote, in his Observa- 
tiones Sacrae, Lib. IV. cap. xiv. § xviii — xx. p. 1099 — 1102. 



264 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vii. 

one of whom, the most distinguished perhaps in personal 
appearance, he directs his discourse. The promise is evi- 
dently announced by this same personage, (v. 10,) as none 
other can be understood without introducing an additional 
speaker, of whom the text gives no intimation. That the 
reproof and repetition of the promise contained in v. 13 — 15, 
which are ascribed to " the Lord," n")5T, were conveyed by 
some other agent than the person just referred to, or one of 
the two angels that accompany him, must be granted to be 
possible. But I think every reader will perceive that such 
a supposition is wholly destitute of probability. Pursuing 
the narrative, we find that Abraham's guests bend their 
course towards Sodom, attended by their host ; that before 
he " returns" home (v. 33,) " the Lord" communicates to 
him his purpose of destruction, and Abraham pleads for the 
guilty cities. The language of the sixteenth verse is re- 
sumed in the twenty-second, the intermediate being parenthe- 
tical. It is said, " and the men rose up from thence and 
looked towards Sodom ;" and again, " and the men turned 
their faces from thence and went toward Sodom." It is 
most natural to suppose, that the " three" mentioned in the 
second verse are intended ; and yet it is equally natural to 
infer from what immediately follows, v. 17 ss., that the per- 
son who makes the communication ascribed to "the Lord," 
and to whom Abraham appears to address his supplication, 
is one of the same party. From the latter part of the 
twenty-second verse, " the men — went toward Sodom, but 
Abraham stood yet before the Lord," and from the narrative 
in the next chapter, from which it appears that only " two" 
of the angels proceed to Sodom in order to accomplish 
the divine purpose, this inference is strengthened. The con- 
clusion would, therefore, seem to be, that the most promi- 
nent of the three personages introduced in the narrative, is 
he whom Abraham principally addresses ; that, if he accom- 



chap. xi. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 265 

panied the other two beyond the precincts of Abraham's 
residence, he did not afterwards rejoin them ; and that these 
two are identical with the angels who deliver Lot and des- 
troy Sodom. 

Still, however, if this be granted, the supposition that 
Abraham employed the title "^"NS in the third verse, in the 
sense of ni?T is inadmissible ; for doubtless he addressed 
the stranger with the ordinary title of civility and respect, 
as Lot did the two angels, and as the woman of Samaria 
did our Lord, before she knew anything respecting him, ex- 
cept that he was a Jew fatigued by travelling. See John 
iv. 11. The supposition itself is no doubt of very high an- 
tiquity, as it certainly appears in the Chaldee Targum, which 
uses the abbreviation for Jehovah, ^\ The use of the sin- 
gular in the Septuagint, Vulgate, and Syriac versions, proves 
nothing ; as it may be employed in reference to the most 
prominent of the three. Our own translation " my Lord," 
agrees with this opinion. Still, if the received punctuation 
be followed, i pi& may be the plural with the suffix, the 
vowel being lengthened on account of the accent. 

The Jewish interpreters having laid it down as a princi- 
ple, that no more than one commission is delegated to one 
angel at a time, account for the mission of three by saying, 
that one was sent to predict the birth of a son to Abraham, 
another to save Lot, and the third to destroy the devoted 
cities. Hence they attempt to explain some of the pecu- 
liarities of this narrative. For instance, the plural number 
is employed in the first nine verses, (except the third, for 
which a reason has already been given,) while the promise 
of the birth of a son, (v. 10,) is made in the singular. So 
in xix. 17 — 22, where one of the angels speaks, and is ad- 
dressed by Lot. But this is rather plausible than solid. 
For in the latter reference, both singular and plural are 
34 



266 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vn„ 

used in intimate connexion in v. 17 : M and it came to pass, 
when they had brought them forth abroad, that he said.' 
And from what precedes, it is plain that this distinction of 
offices is assumed without proof. The promise of a son is 
indeed in the singular, but the inquiry for Sarah, which in- 
troduces it, is in the plural : (xviii. 9, 10.) Thus, too, in xix. 
10, 11, 12, 15, 16, Lot's security is ascribed indifferently to 
both the angels. And so also in reference to the destruction 
of the cities in v. 13. Such language as that in v. 21, 22, is 
easily explicable. One among a multitude of agents might 
employ it ; much more one of two. The natural and sim- 
ple supposition, that Lot or Abraham addresses the agent 
who is apparently the most prominent, or even the most 
accessible, satisfactorily explains the alternate use of either 
number. 

The narrative under consideration, according to the view 
above taken of it, suggests an inquiry of no little interest 
both in its nature and results. If it be one of the three 
seeming men whom Abraham addresses by the title " the 
Lord," ilirp, does it follow that the person so addressed is 
really the uncreated 1 — is it God himself who appears under 
the image of a man ? — or, is the divine agent, whom Je- 
hovah sends to effect his purposes, regarded as his substitute, 
inasmuch as he acts by his authority ; and does he conse- 
quently appear invested with his dignity, assuming his 
name and character ? To settle this question by a full ex- 
amination of Scripture and ancient Jewish authority, would 
be quite incompatible with the brevity of these notes. No 
doubt, as Drusius remarks, it is the general practice in these 
accounts, to ascribe to God what the angels whom he com- 
missions are said to do ; and the Lord is often said to speak 
and act when he employs the instrumentality of an angel. 
The principle on which such phraseology occurs, is stated 
in the axiom, qui facit per alium facit per se. In the nar- 



CHAP.XI.27—XXY.H.] NOTES TO GENESIS, 267 

rative the instrument employed is frequently unnoticed, 
*' because" (to use the words of Maimonides, More Nevo- 
chim, Part II. chap. 41, fol. 55,) " of the well known and 
fundamental principle, that prophecy is communicated only 
by means of an angel." He refers to Gen. xii. 1, xxxi. 3, 
and several other places. — Still, I rather think, that the view 
of most of the ancient Jews and Christian fathers, who 
thought that the divine person, who is afterwards denom- 
inated the Logos, is the being who manifests himself in 
several of the extraordinary appearances attributed to Je- 
hovah under the old dispensation, is best supported by the 
general analogy of scripture in relation to this subject. See 
Hengstenberg's Christology, Vol. I. p. 219 ss., Keith's 
Translation, 164 ss., where the reader will find a great 
deal of valuable information, although he will hardly be 
able to acquiesce in all the learned author's criticism and 
reasoning. 

In order that the reader may judge for himself on this 
point, it may be well to call his attention to those portions 
of the book of Genesis which bear upon the subject. 

After that under review, which is the first in order, the 
twenty-first chapter contains the next instance. Hagar, in 
her desolate condition, is almost reduced to despair at the 
prospect of her son's death. " And God heard the voice of 
the lad ; and the angel of Gud called to Hagar out of 
heaven, and said unto her, what aileth thee, Hagar ? fear 
not, for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is. 
Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand ; for / 
will make him a great nation.' v. 17, 18. The most natural 
construction of these words is undoubtedly that which iden- 
tifies the angel of God with the one who promises to make 
Ishmael a great nation. And, if this be the true construc- 
tion, the angel claims divine prerogative ; as it is not to be 
supposed that any creature would appropriate to himself the 



268 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vn. 

power and will implied in the promise. If it should be 
said, that God himself is the speaker in the eighteenth verse, 
and that an ellipsis of ' and he saith,' or some such phrase, 
is to be supplied after the seventeenth, the possibility 
of this is not to be denied : indeed, under certain circum- 
stances, such an ellipsis would be quite natural. But whether 
it were intended by the author, and the interpreter has there- 
fore a right to claim this, and supply it, is entirely another 
question. An examination of other analogous places affords 
the most satisfactory ground of decision, and leads, I think, 
to the conclusion, that no such ellipsis was intended. This 
will appear from some of the texts which remain to be 
adduced. 

The next passage bearing on the subject may be found in 
the twenty-second chapter. In the first verse, God is said 
to try Abraham, by commanding him to sacrifice his son. 
Jehovah's angel prevents the consummation of the act, and 
the language employed (v. 12,) to convey the prohibition, is 
most readily explained on the supposition, that he is himself 
a divine person : " Lay not thine hand upon the lad, for now 
I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not with- 
held thine only son from me." Unless this be allowed, we 
must suppose an unnatural ellipsis of some phrase to indi- 
cate that God is the speaker. It cannot be objected to the 
view here preferred, that, if it were correct, the language 
would be this: "now I know that thou fearest me;" because 
the use of the noun for the pronoun is very common in He- 
brew. Comp. xxxv. 1 ; and note 83, below. 

The next passage is in chapter xxxi. By comparing the 
eleventh and thirteenth verses, it is evident, that " the angel of 
God" is said to declare himself to be " the God of Bethel," to 
whom Jacob had vowed a vow, as is related in xxxiii. 20 — 22. 
It would seem undeniable, that the patriarch regarded him as 
a really divine person. And, if this conclusion required any 



CHAP. XI. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 269 

confirmation, the language in xxxii. 9, would afford the fullest. 
For the being who commands his return to the land of his 
kindred is " Jehovah, the God of his fathers Abraham and 
Isaac." 

The same result is fairly attained by comparing xxxii. 
28 — 30, with Hosea xii. 3, 4, 1 Kings xviii. 31, and 2 Kings 
xvii. 34. The same agent is denominated indifferently, 
God, Jehovah, angel of God, or of Jehovah. Compare also 
xxxv. 10 ss. 

The last passage in the book of Genesis, is xlviii. 15, 16. 
" God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did 
walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day, 
the angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads." 
Here the God of Abraham and Isaac is plainly identical 
with the angel who delivered Jacob from the various evils 
which had surrounded him. Most certainly, this is Jacob's 
own impression ; and unless this angel is really divine, it 
would seem impossible to vindicate the patriarch from the 
charge of superstition and idolatry. 

This view of the subject coincides with the plain meaning 
of certain texts elsewhere occurring in the Pentateuch. Thus 
in Ex. iii. 2, it is " the angel of Jehovah" that appears to 
Moses " in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush ;" and 
yet, immediately afterwards, we read that God calls to him 
from the midst of the bush, declares the place to be holy, 
and avows himself to be Jehovah, the God of Abraham, 
Isaac, and Jacob, v. 4 ss. — In xiv. 19, also, " the angel of 
God" and " the pillar of the cloud" are said to go behind the 
Israelites ; and in v. 24, Jehovah is represented as troubling 
" the host of the Egyptians" by looking " through the pillar 
of fire and of the cloud." Dathe, indeed, in his note on 
Ex. xxxiii. 21, adopting the opinion of Herder, that any 
symbol or visible thing under which the invisible God dis- 
plays himself, is called the angel or messenger of Jehovah, 



270 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ pa rt vii. 

says, that the burning bush and the fiery pillar are identical 
with the angel of Jehovah. But the arguments alleged in 
proof are unsatisfactory. Moses, it is said, saw merely the 
burning bush, and heard the voice speaking from it. But 
this is no evidence that the bush and the angel are the same 
thing, for the narrative does not tell us that Moses saw the 
angel : the appearance or manifestation is the whole trans- 
action, comprehending the divine communication made to 
him at the time. The latter part of xiv. 19, is supposed to 
be exegetical of the former, and to convey precisely the 
same thought. But this is assuming the very point to be 
proved, as it may, with far greater probability and much 
more in accordance with scriptural analogy, be maintained, 
that the removal of the pillar was a natural consequence of 
the action before ascribed to the being who is denominated 
the angel of God. 

It is worthy of notice, that the same language occurs in 
Num. xxii., where the narrative of Balaam's journey from 
Mesopotamia to the plains of Moab is narrated. " God's 
anger was kindled because he went," and " the angel of 
Jehovah" opposed him: v. 22 ss. And it is particularly re- 
markable, that, at the end of the interview, the angel declares 
himself to be the author of the communication which Ba- 
laam was to make: "the angel of Jehovah said unto Balaam, 
go with the men ; but only the word that / shall speak unto 
thee, that thou shalt speak," v. 35. In the account which 
follows, " God," " Jehovah," is said to " meet Balaam ; " Je- 
hovah puts a word in his mouth, and the communications 
made to Balak are invariably ascribed to a divine origin. 

Maimonides, in his More Nevochim, Part II. chap. 42, 
fol. 56, Berlin edition, p. 310, BuxtorPs Translation, con- 
siders the circumstance narrated in Num. xxii. as having 
taken place in prophetic vision ; fl^'DSn il&Ofa!!2. In this 
view Dathe acquiesces. Dr. Palfrey, in his work before re- 



CHAP.XI.27-xxv.il.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 27J 

ferred to, supposes Balaam to be relating to the mes- 
sengers of Balak the substance of a divine communica- 
tion which he pretended to have received in a dream, 
in which Jehovah had consented to his making the wished- 
for journey. Respecting these views of the transaction, my 
present purpose merely allows me to remark, that they are 
evidently at variance with the plain meaning of the chapter, 
which exhibits what took place after Balaam had com- 
menced his journey. Comp. v. 21, with the subsequent nar- 
ration, from which it is plain that Balaam is not relating a 
dream. Thus, also, was the narrative understood by the 
apostle St. Peter. 2 Pet. ii. 16. # Dr. Palfrey imagines Ba- 
laam to tell the princes of Moab, that " after persisting, in 
his dream, in the attempt to visit Balak, he heard himself 
addressed by Jehovah's angel, who saw how determined he 
was, with permission to prosecute his journey." p. 383. 
Both Balaam and the messengers of Balak arc consequently 
supposed to consider Jehovah's angel as a real personage. 
On the Doctor's theory, then, this view of the personality of 
this agent is, at least, as ancient as the time of Moses. The 
question of its origination is worthy of his consideration. 

(82.) Lot's offer of his two daughters as a substitute for 
his guests, is not to be mentioned except in terms of the 
strongest reprobation. Viewed in any light, it was an un- 
pardonable violation of duty. The fact that the sacred 
writers relate matters of this sort, and such as are mentioned 
towards the end of the chapter, respecting their most dis- 
tinguished characters, is one among the many internal proofs 
of the correctness of their accounts. The sacredness of the 
rites of hospitality, and the very low estimate in which the 

* I am aware that the genuineness of this epistle has been denied ; 
but I think on grounds entirely insufficient. Its authenticity is quite 
susceptible of proof* 



272 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part VII. 

female character was held in ancient times, and, it may rea- 
sonably be supposed, particularly in so dissolute a place as 
Sodom, may be pleaded in palliation of this abominable offer. 
The host would feel his honor to be implicated, and, lest his 
guests should suspect him of treachery, would endeavor, by 
making the most unreasonable and even outrageous propo- 
sition, to assure them of his sincerity. Distracted too by 
various emotions, Lot may have been hardly conscious of 
what he was saying, the violence of his feelings suggesting 
the most extravagant declaration ; as was afterwards the 
case with Reuben, when he endeavored to reconcile his 
father to Benjamin's accompanying his brothers to Egypt, 
by offering his own two sons to be slain by their grand- 
father, if he did not bring back the favorite. Gen. xlii. 37. 
Besides, as the narrative shows that the family of Lot had 
formed alliances in Sodom, which no doubt were with the 
most distinguished among its citizens, he would most proba- 
bly presume, that the men would not dare to incur the ven- 
gence to which the acceptance of such an offer would expose 
them. This consideration will derive additional force, if it 
be granted that the two daughters mentioned in the text 
(v. 8,) are the same as those who are spoken of in the 
fourteenth verse. Their being said to be "married" involves 
no great difficulty, as this may express their betrothed state, 
and their accepted suitors may be called Lot's " sons-in- 
law." And the words of the next verse, " thy two daugh- 
ters which are here," does not prove that they had sisters 
living elsewhere with their husbands. However this may 
be, it is certain that Lot's domestic connexion with some of 
the families of Sodom, may have induced him to believe 
that his offer would be rejected. 

(83.) The expression " brimstone and fire," denotes light- 
ning producing sulphuric streams. Comp. Ps. xi. 6, where 



chap.xi.27—xxv.11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 273 

the language is evidently formed on the narrative of this 
overthrow. See also Ezek. xxxviii. 22. From the four- 
teenth chapter it appears, that " the vale of Siddim," in 
which Sodom and Gomorrah were situated, (compare v. 10 
with v. 3,) abounded with bituminous pits. The word ren- 
dered "slime" in our translation, is used to express some 
cohesive substance ; that, for instance, which served to ce- 
ment the bricks of which the tower of Babel was built; 
xi. 3, and to coat the ark of rushes in which the infant 
Moses was placed: Ex. ii. 3, where it is used in connexion 
with " pitch." It is, therefore, very suitable to express the 
nature of bitumen; and the name "lacus Asphaltites," which 
is sometimes applied to the Dead Sea, evidently alludes to 
this property of the soil. Of course, so combustible a sub* 
stance would be readily enkindled by the lightning ; and if, 
as some writers have conjectured, the country contained 
streams of Naphtha, the effect would be accelerated. The 
current of the Jordan, filling, up the chasm which the burn- 
ing of the bituminous substance must have occasioned, would 
form a lake. See a dissertation on the subject of the over-' 
throw of Sodom and the other cities, in the Bible de Vencc, 
Tom. I. p. 593 ss. 

The expression in the text, " the Lord rained — from the 
Lord" is Hebraistic for, 'the Lord rained from himself.' The" 
noun is used where most other languages would employ the 
pronoun. The same idiom occurs in 1 Kings viii. 1, "So- 
lomon assembled the elders — unto king Solomon ;" also, in 
Isa. vii. 11, " the Lord spake unto Ahaz, saying, ask a sign 
of the Lord ;" in Matt. xii. 26, " if Satan cast out Satan ;" 
and in various other places. It may be said, that, according 
to this view, the second noun, or the pronoun which would 
denote it, is inexplicable, as it cannot refer to the apparent 
source of the destructive flume, that being denoted by the 
phrase, " out of heaven." Hengstenberg assumes that this. 
35 



274 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vu. 

phrase and the other " from himself" are " of the same im- 
port." Ubi sup. p. 220, Keith's Translation, p. 165. It must 
be granted to be unnecessary ; but it is far from being inex- 
plicable, such pleonasms being very frequent. Compare 
sv sau<rw in John vi. 61, xi. 38. It is possible that the pleo- 
nastic form may be used to express more strongly the idea, 
that this destructive element was sent and directed by the 
Lord. Compare the phrase "life in himself" in John v. 26. 

(84.) As salt is sometimes used to express perpetuity, it 
has been suggested that the phrase " pillar of salt," may be 
equivalent to ' a perpetual pillar,'' ' a standing monument.' 
Num. xviii. 19, and 2 Chron. xiii. 5, are appealed to in de- 
fence of this supposition ; but without success, as in both 
instances Ebl2 is added, and the phrase ' a covenant of salt* 
is founded on the usage of eating salt together as a token of 
friendship, and denotes perpetuity, inviolable character. See 
JEneidXII. 173, "dant fruges maribus salsas;" and compare 
Parkhurst's Hebrew Lexicon, under Hbfa II., and Suicer's 
Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus, under akag II. A. — Dathe trans- 
lates nbfa ^35 ^n?! thus: "in solo salsuginoso hsesit in- 
fixa." No doubt the ground itself might be called saline, 
but the close connexion between ^^35 and Flbfa and the 
omission of the preposition, make it more probable that the 
former word is in construction with the latter. Lot's wife 
being suffocated, her person probably became gradually indu- 
rated and encrusted by the floating vapor. " Fragments 
of fossil salt in various forms are found in the vicinity of the 
Dead Sea,"* some one of which, no doubt Josephus mistook 
for this pillar, when he supposed himself to have seen it. 

* See the authorities referred to in Robinson's Gesenius, under 

^30 2. 



chap. xi. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 275 

See his Antiquities, Lib. I. cap. xi. § 4. — Other views of 
the meaning of the phrase " pillar of salt," may be seen in 
Suicer, ubi sup., B. 

(85.) The ingenious conjecture of Michaelis, that a part 
of Lot's flock may have been with their attendants in some 
district sufficiently remote from the scene of destruction to 
escape being involved in the ruin, is very probable. Had 
he sustained the loss of all his effects, it is reasonable to 
suppose that he would have resorted to Abraham, his noble- 
hearted and affectionate kinsman, between whom and him- 
self, we have no reason to think that any other feelings than 
those of kindness and regard subsisted. We find that his 
daughters were able to procure wine ; and, as it is difficult 
to suppose that they would have ventured to do what is re- 
lated in the text, unless they hoped to deceive their father 
into the belief of their being other women, it is likely that 
they were not the only female inmates of the cave. Exces- 
sive, indeed, must have been Lot's want of consciousness, 
on the opposite supposition. The language of the elder 
daughter to her sister in v. 31, only shows that she appre- 
hended all the men of that region to have been destroyed ; 
an opinion perhaps hastily formed, and suggested by the 
terrific nature of the catastrophe. Indeed, she may have 
supposed her father, like a second Noah, to be the only male 
survivor of the conflagration, and that the earth was again 
to be peopled from one family. These are considerations 
which may serve in some degree to palliate the flagrant 
enormity. — Moab implies that the child owed its birth to 
her father. For the composition of the word, see Gesenius 
under l&lfa and ifa. Ben-Ammi, ^J?" 1 ]^ is literally, 'son 
of my people.' It denotes that the child was born of the 
mother's own stock, without intercourse with one of any 
other line. 



276 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part VH. 

(8GJ) From the similarity of the leading circumstances in 
ihis chapter with those in xii. JO — 20, it has been conjec- 
tured, that both these portions of the history are founded on 
the same fact. It must be acknowledged to be very re- 
markable, that two events so strikingly alike should have oc- 
curred in Abraham's life. But, if these portions of the book 
of Genesis are both genuine, (and not a particle of proof to 
the contrary exists, unless the improbability of the case be 
assumed as evidence,) it is impossible to explain them in re- 
ference to the same occurrence ; unless, indeed, it could be 
allowed, against all reasonable evidence, that gross corrup- 
tions exist in one or other of the accounts. 

The supposition, appearing in both the narratives, on 
which danger is apprehended, is that of Sarah's beauty. What 
is said in xvii. 17, xviii. 11, 12, contains nothing which is ne- 
cessarily at variance with this idea. Women are some- 
times to be met with of sufficient age to be in the situation 
in which she is described in the texts referred to, who are 
yet imposing and even beautiful in appearance. It is not 
unnatural, therefore, that, in those days, when the freshness 
of youth was doubtless proportioned to the length of life, 
and the mode of living was natural and simple, a woman 
of distinguished beauty should preserve some of her charms 
even to a late period of life. It ought also to be considered, 
that the attractions of a foreign lady, even if they had be- 
come somewhat diminished, may well be supposed sufficient 
to make an impression on an eastern prince, satiated, it may 
be, with indulgence in native beauty. 

It is objected, that the event occurs twice in the life of 
Abraham, (xii. xx.,) and that a similar circumstance is re- 
lated of Isaac, (xxvi. 6 — 10 ;) that Gerar, the name of the 
theatre of action, and Abimelech, that of the party con- 
cerned, are the same in the latter case of the father, and in 
^hat of the son. But, if such a brutal attack on private 



CHAP. XI. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 277 

rights may be supposed to have once taken place, it will 
surely be difficult to say why, under similar circumstances, 
a similar attack may not have been made more than once. 
With respect to Isaac, however, this was not the case. 
The narrative merely states his apprehension ; but it does 
not appear that the anticipated evil did actually occur. The 
king of the country protected the daughter-in-law of Abra- 
ham, xxvi. 7 — 11. 

Abimelech was probably the common name of those 
kings, as Pharaoh was of the Egyptian monarchs ; and 
Phichol, (blD^S 'mouth of all,') may also have been an ap- 
pellation borne in common by the royal " captain," the com- 
mander of all, their spokesman also, bringing their petitions 
to the king. Compare xxvi. 26, with xxi. 22. 

Respecting the narrative in the chapter before us, it may be 
remarked, however, that there is really nothing in the context 
which obliges us to place the event after those related in the 
previous chapter. The expression "from thence" in v. 1, car- 
ries us back to the " place" of Abraham's residence, (xviii. 33,) 
which we know to have been among the oaks of Mamre, 
where he had dwelt since the settlement of Lot in Sodom. 
Compare xviii. 1, xiv. 13, and xiii. 18. Consequently it only 
proves the event related to have occurred during some period 
of the time that Abraham resided in this place. Further still, 
there is plain proof, that it could not have occurred after 
the facts immediately before related. The birth of Lot's 
two sons, (xix. 37, 38,) must have been at least nearly a 
year after the promise repeated to Abraham in xviii. 10, 
which, in all probability, was verified about a year after it 
was made. If, therefore, the removal to Gerar took place 
after Lot's sons were born, it must have been nearly con- 
temporaneous with Isaac's birth, which is contradicted by 
all the circumstances of the case. If it be supposed to have 
been contemporaneous with Lot's leaving Zoar, and taking 



278 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



PART VII. 



up his abode in the cave, and thus but a short time after the 
promise just referred to, still the difficulties will be inexpli- 
cable ; for what is said in v. 17, 18, imply that some con- 
siderable time must have elapsed, in order to satisfy the 
Philistine family both of the infliction and of its removal. 
But this would oblige us to allow that in the meanwhile 
Isaac was born, which we know was not the case. Besides, 
the great age of Sarah (xviii. 11, xvii. 17,) makes it alto- 
gether improbable, that even her personal beauty could 
have been so great as to attract the king's attention, which 
the eleventh verse clearly enough intimates was the result 
that Abraham feared. On the whole, it is best to admit that 
this account is not in chronological order, and that the oc- 
currence took place at a much earlier period than the con- 
nexion would lead us to suppose. 

(87.) Verse 7 : " he is a prophet." The proper and pro- 
bably original meaning of this word is, ' one who speaks as 
God's substitute or ambassador.' Thus, in Exod. vii. 1, it is 
said, " I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron shall 
be thy prophet ;" of which the language in iv. 16. is ex- 
planatory : " he shall be thy spokesman unto the people : — 
he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to 
him instead of God." To the same purpose, Jer. xv. 19 : 
" if thou take forth the precious from the vile, thou shalt be 
as my mouth" Among the Greeks ne^r^s and vito^rrig 
seem to have been equivalent, 'one who speaks for,' (before,) 
or 'under,' that is, 'in the place of another.' See 2 Pet. i. 
20, 21. " Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man ; 
but holy men of eld spake as they were moved by the Holy 
Ghost;" and with this text compare the passage from Philo 
quoted by Hahn in his Lehrbuch des Christlichen Glaubens, 
§ 22, Anm. 3, p. 120, and also by Gesenius under fc^jlj ♦ 
rfpotpqryig yag /<5iov jxsv ovdsv cwro^syysraj, aXkorgnx, 6s rfavra, ucr"*)- 



CHAP. XI. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 279 

■%ovv<ros faigov. This is also a very usual sense of the word 
in the New Testament. The meaning of 'one who predicts 
future events' is secondary. Abraham, therefore, is an- 
nounced to Abimelech as a sacred character, the interpreter 
of God, speaking as his agent. 

(88.) The words of Abimelech to Sarah in v. 16 have 
been variously explained. The use of the term ' brother' 
for husband is suggested by the attempted deceit. If the 
pronoun fc^H relate to Abraham, as Aben Ezra supposes, the 
translation will be as in the English version, " he is to thee 
a covering of the eyes unto, (with respect to.) all who are 
with thee ;" that is, ' he is able to protect thee from any im- 
pertinence, to guard thy modesty.' Most critics, however, 
refer it to the money just mentioned, the C]£3, with which it 
agrees. This is sanctioned by the Septuagint %»Xia Si- 
^a^M<a — • Taura i'^ai, and the Vulgate, " hoc erit." The Ara- 
bic also gives the same meaning, and most probably the 
Syriac. The sense usually given is as follows : ' it is for a 
covering of thine eyes ;' it is intended to supply you with 
veils, ' for (with a view to,) all who are with you ;' that is, 
in order that all who fall in company with you may perceive 
that you are married. It is further stated, that, in those early 
times, it was the usage for eastern women who were married 
to wear veils, perhaps as a token of subjection, (compare 1 
Cor. xi. 10, 1 Pet. iii. 5, 6,) while maidens did not cover the 
face. See xii. 14, where Sarah passes for an unmarried 
woman; also xxiv. 16, 17, which shows that Rebecca's face 
was then uncovered, (compare xxix. 9 ss. ;) but when she is 
about to meet Isaac, v. 65, she puts on a veil, thus implying 
that she had become his wife. The suggestion of Abimelech 
is therefore a delicate reproof of Sarah for representing her- 
self as Abraham's unmarried sister. 

The exclusive use of the veil by married women is, 



280 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vil. 

however, confidently denied by Gesenius, (see him under 
JTRDS,) who remarks, that " it is manifestly contrary 
to oriental custom, and is incapable of proof." He does not 
take notice of the texts referred to, which appear to favor 
the usage just stated. His intimation, that one thousand 
shekels would be an exorbitant price for a veil, is no very 
strong objection, as it need not be presumed that the donor 
intended the whole sum to be appropriated to the purchase, 
but such a proportion as might be necessary. By the phrase 
" covering of the eyes," he understands, " a present offered 
as an expiation for a fault, in order that one may shut his 
eyes upon it, connive at it." Compare 1 Sam. xii. 3> " a 
bribe, to blind mine eyes therewith •," where, although the 
words are different, the sentiment is evidently the same. 

Mendelsohn, in the »1D"1jD T"n» gives the same view of 
the phrase " covering of the eyes." His version is as fol- 
lows : " Behold, I have given thy brother one thousand 
pieces of silver. These may serve thee as a satisfaction 
[amende honorable,) with respect to all who are with thee ; 
but with respect to every other thou wilt be defended." The 
interpretation of Rabbi Solomon of Dubno," printed in the 
same work, is to the same purpose : " & r i!l (the thing which 
I have, given him will be) Q" 1 ^ ImSD "p to thee a cover- 
ing of the eyes, (like TOjI in Prov. xii. 16, that is, that no 
disgrace may attach to thee on account of this, and it may 
not be said that I have indulged my passion with thee.) To 
all who are with thee, (that is, thy household, or others 
who see this at present.) [he means who are witnesses of 
this satisfaction ;] and with all, (that is, but with all the men 
who have not seen the honorable satisfaction which I have 
been obliged to make thee. tl^T, the "1 has the sense of but.) 
£inD!D1 (thou wilt be defended by the men who have now 
seen thy satisfaction, who will publicly declare what their 
eyes have seen.) £irD5 is benoni feminine Niphal, the proper 



CHAP. xi. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 281 

form being HPl^D or tlTOH the patuch being employed on 
account of the guttural, as in £"l? j"fa, the _ at the end of the 
verse being changed into x ." — The latter part of the verse 
is not clear. Dathe reads it, without regard to the Athnach 
under tjSTljSJ, as forming a connected clause, and follows the 
Septuagint and Syriac, (he says also the Vulgate, but this is a 
mistake,) in omitting the vau before the last word. He consid- 
ers this as the second person feminine of the preterite Niphal, 
from H^ (which, in that case, as the Jewish writer just 
quoted remarks, ought to be written Fin?3l») an <i gives it 
the same meaning as it would have in the Hiphil or Hith- 
pael, ' to show' or ' show one's self.' The result affords a 
very clear and intelligible sense, thus : ' that to all who are 
with you as well as to all, (that is, whoever may see you,) 
you may be known ;' in other words, may appear as a mar- 
ried woman. Still there is no sufficient reason for departing 
from the masoretical reading. The word JTlHSll may be 
the benoni participle, as Rabbi Solomon says, and may have 
the meaning given by him. Or it may be the remark of the 
author, and in immediate connexion with the two preceding 
words. In either case, the 1 is pleonastic, as is not unusual. 
Thus the meaning will be : ' and in all,' that is, as to the 
whole matter, the attempted deceit, ' she was reproved,' or 
convicted and silenced. 

(89.) The conduct of Abraham in this affair, and also in 
that before related, chap, xii., as well as that of Isaac after- 
wards mentioned, xxvi. 7 ss., is not to be vindicated, how- 
ever easy it may be to suggest considerations of a palliative 
kind. The want of entire reliance on divine Providence 
must be acknowledged ; but that man must be very ignorant 
of his own heart, who does not feel that the frailty of na- 
ture would, in most minds, have suggested some expedient 
36 



282 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vii. 

equally unwarranted. It is possible that both these patri- 
archs may have resorted to a false representation with the 
view of preventing an attack immediately on their arrival, 
trusting at the same time to favorable circumstances for 
disclosing the real truth of the case. It may have been 
their object to anticipate immediate assault and outrage, and 
their hope to prevent any alliance by a timely representa- 
tion of the real connexion. The behaviour of Abimelech. 
is in part laudable, and in part otherwise. He did not 
know the relationship of Sarah to Abraham, and he imme- 
diately complies with the divine direction to restore her. 
If then it should be asked, wherein lay the justice of 
punishing him by afflicting his family, and also himself;* it 
may be replied, that the mere fact of his taking Sarah was 
culpable, inasmuch as it was an unwarranted aggression on 
the rights of the traveller ; and, as it is not to be imagined 
that Abraham w T ould • have voluntarily surrendered his sup- 
posed sister, it was also an act of violence. The language 
of the latter part of the fifth, and the former of the sixth 
verses, must be explained by the immediately preceding 
context: Abimelech's "integrity and innocence" are granted 
so far as regards an intention of depriving the patriarch of 
his wife, and therefore, the mercy of God providentially in- 
terposes to prevent further criminality ; but his conduct in 
seizing her at all still makes him censurable. 

(90.) The word rendered " mocking" in v. 9, is derived 
from the same root as the name Isaac, and might, be ren- 
dered ' laughing at.' The same verb is elsewhere used to 
express the grossest insult, as in the false accusation of 
Potiphar's wife, xxxix. 14, 17, "the Hebrew servant came 

* It is clear from v. 17, that some personal affliction had fallen on 
Abimelech ; perhaps sickness of some sort. Compare v. 3, 4, first 
clause, with the latter half of the 6th. 



chap. xi. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 283 

in unto me to mock me." Some old Jewish authorities 
speak of Sarah's having observed in Ishmael a disposition to 
idolatry and various vices. (See Fagius and Drusius in 
loc.) But this is only a Rabbinical fiction. Acacius, quoted 
by the latter commentator, suggests whether the word 
pHS^ may not mean ' fighting with and persecuting,' as in 
2 Sam. ii. 14. But here the root is PD"b, (although it is 
most likely that both roots are of the same origin.) and the 
context shows the nature of the sport or " play," to use the 
word of our own version, that Joab meant. Besides, the 
supposition of personal violence in the case of Ishmael and 
Isaac, is wholly out of the question. Something insulting, 
and perhaps malicious and infidel, is all that the word in this 
connexion wili bear. " He did not merely laugh," says 
Hengstenberg, (Authentic, I. p. 276,) " he made himself 
merry. The little helpless Isaac, a father of nations ! Un- 
belief, jealousy, pride, led him to this behaviour. Want of 
faith made it appear to him ridiculous, to connect such great 
results with such a feeble cause." Neither does the use 
which St. Paul, in Gal. iv. 22 ss., makes of the facts here re- 
lated require any stronger meaning. He may well apply 
the term " persecution," v. 29, to such conduct, particularly 
as he compares it with the treatment to which the true 
Christians of his day were subjected, by the advocates for 
the outward Jewish ceremonial in opposition to its spiritual 
import. 

It has often been objected to this narrative, that Abra- 
ham's conduct towards Hagar and Ishmael was unfeeling, 
unworthy alike of a kind master and an affectionate father, 
both which characters his history in general represents him 
as sustaining in a very high degree. In reply it may be 
said, that the patriarch himself was greatly distressed at the 
thought of complying with his wife's wishes, and his con- 
sent was gained only in consequence of a divine direction ; 



284 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vii. 

that the melancholy condition of Hagar and Ishmael in the 
wilderness was owing to unforeseen and fortuitous circum* 
stances ; that the providence of God had in view the sepa- 
ration of Isaac and his family from Ishmael and his connex- 
ions, (compare xxv. 6,) to preserve the promised race as a 
distinct body, in order to carry into effect the plan which he 
had formed ; and that the occurrences here mentioned had 
a direct tendency to form the character of Ishmael and his 
posterity, leading to their national distinction, and were 
therefore ultimately beneficial to him. That he was con- 
sequently forever afterwards excluded from intercourse 
with his father's family, is neither stated in the history, nor 
reasonable in itself. The fact that he united with Isaac in 
the last honors paid to Abraham's body, (xxv. 9,) affords 
presumptive evidence to the contrary, and favorable to the 
opinion that the two brothers lived in harmony. This de- 
fence, it can hardly be questioned, is sufficiently satis^ 
factory. 

There is, however, another consideration which appears to 
me to afford an additional reason for the conduct of divine 
Providence as here exhibited. St. Paul, as above referred 
to, teaches us that the facts here related were intended to 
convey allegorical instruction. The words, v. 24, <x<nva soViv 
dXXTjyo^oujuueva, are no doubt incorrectly rendered in our ver^ 
sion, " which things are an allegory," for the Greek will not 
allow such a translation, nor does the idea which it most 
naturally suggests meet with any encouragement from the 
author's writings. The apostle never represents the his- 
torical facts of the Old Testament as allegories. But it is 
equally clear, on the other hand, that he does represent the 
facts under consideration as designed, in the same manner 
as parables, to convey religious instruction. Some com- 
mentators have indeed resorted to the convenient hypothesis 
of accommodation to the allegorical method of interpreta- 



CHAP. XI. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 285 

tion, which, they say, was then prevalent among the Jews. 
A few, allowing that this is not in character with St. Paul's 
ordinary mode of instruction, are of opinion, that he does 
himself intimate to the reader his intention of accommo- 
dating to the Jewish usage, in the application which he is 
about to make of the facts immediately recounted. This inti- 
mation is, they think, conveyed in the twentieth verse, where 
he expresses his "desire to change his voice," that is, to alter 
his general method of instruction, or to adapt himself to each 
one's thought and feeling, thus condescending to the erroneous 
use of allegory, in accommodation to their Jewish weakness 
and prejudice. See Hahn's Lehrbuch, § 14, Amm. 2, p. 
65 ; and his treatise on the Grammatico-Historical Interpre- 
tation of the Scriptures, published in the Biblical Reposi- 
tory, Vol. I. No. I. p. 133. That this view of the clause is 
forced and unnatural, will be granted by almost every 
candid mind. The apostle's question in v. 21, " do ye not 
hear the law ?" ' do ye not perceive and attend to what the 
scripture itself intimates V evidently shows, that he not only 
considered the instruction which he was about to convey as 
implied in the facts recorded, but that his readers might 
themselves have drawn from the record some such instruc- 
tion. In a word, he considers Sarah and her son as prefl- 
gurative of the Christian church and its spiritual members, 
while Hagar and Ishmael represent the Jewish community 
devoted to an external religion, characterized by elementary 
principles, mere rites and ceremonies of a fleshly nature. 
If then it be allowed that this is the true view of the case, 
and if the facts here stated were intended to be emblematic 
of what was afterwards to exist under the Gospel, the vast 
importance of the things adumbrated affords an additional 
reason why divine wisdom should allow the influence of 
Sarah's feelings to lead to the expulsion of Ishmael and his 
mother, with the whole train of occurrences that followed 



286 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vii. 

it. Such a view of the facts is in harmony with the scrip, 
tural representation of the connexion of the old and new 
covenants, w T hich is illustrated by the doctrine that the one 
was intended to be symbolical of the other. 

(91.) The word tjbtfS'l, rendered " she cast," may possi- 
bly express the wretched mother's despair, as if in frenzied 
agony she had thrown off from her the son of her love. 
This would hot be unnatural. But it does not require such 
a meaning. It is used by Reuben when he proposes to put 
Joseph into a pit, while at the same time he is planning his 
safety ; xxxvii. 22. Neither in this verse nor in the twenty- 
fourth, where it occurs again, can it fairly require any strong- 
er meaning than placed or put. In the first and last of 
these three passages, the Septuagint has sffi^s and e^i^av, 
and in the second, sf/./3aXXs<rs. But neither do these words 
necessarily imply force, as is plain from Matt. ix. 38, xv. 30. 
The text simply states that Hagar laid her exhausted child 
on the ground. 

(92.) The Septuagint renders the Hebrew u-j^X^v, lofty, 
considering the word probably as derived from fli^l 
to see. To the same purpose Aquila, xct<ra(pav7j, and perhaps 
Symmachus, <r% hieradlag, followed by the Vulgate, terram 
visionis ; although it is not improbable that these terms are 
in allusion to the name given to the place by Abraham. See 
v. 14. The Syriac translator appears to have read a dif- 
ferent text, for he renders it, " the land of the Amorites." 
It is no doubt the name of that region of country, on a part 
of which the temple was afterwards built. See 2 Chron. iii. 
1. This may perhaps account for the remarkable version 
found in the Chaldee, and Arabic, bolh of which have ' the 

land of worship ;' fcOnb^S ^1^, a5llJt <£lS. 



CHAP. ii. 27— xxv. 11.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 287 

(93.) The preparation of the wood, and the transportation 
of it to such a distance, seems at first view a very unneces- 
sary inconvenience, as Abraham might reasonably expect 
to find fuel at the appointed place. Perhaps it was done 
that the wood might be dry. Perhaps, too, it was usual to 
prepare the fuel used on sacrificial occasions in some par- 
ticular way. The Jews, during the time of the second 
temple, were very careful to procure clean wood, and there- 
fore priests, who on examination were discovered to have 
any blemish, were set to remove the worms that might be 
found in it, and rooms connected with the court of the 
women were appropriated to this purpose. See Light- 
foot's Temple Service, chap, xviii. 2, Works, Vol. I. fol. p. 
1G93, London, 1684. It is very probable that even the cere- 
monial of sacrifice was observed, in this early period, with 
great regard to circumstance, however unimportant in 
itself. 

(94.) The language of the fifth verse is worthy of more 
than ordinary attention. . Is it the language of deceit ? 
Under circumstances of such appalling interest, does the- 
patriarch assure his servants that he and his son would re- 
turn to them when the act of worship was over, while at 
the same time he expected to leave the bones of his son Isaac 
on the altar from which the smoke of his sacrificed body 
had ascended ? I think not. Surely this is the language of 
faith: Abraham is persuaded that, in some way or other, 
Jehovah would interpose to prevent the final loss of his son, 
through whom alone the divine promises could be ratified. 
And the same faith prompts the reply in the eighth verse. 
That he did cherish such a persuasion, is a result to which 
we are led solely from the narrative. Either he believed 
that his God would interpose and prevent the sacrifice ; or 
he expected that he would raise to life again the victim, 



288 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART vn. 

should he choose to insist upon the offering. The remark 
of the inspired author of the epistle to the Hebrews, " rea- 
soning (Xoy»tfaf/,svo£,) that God was able to raise up even 
from the dead," xi. 19, is in favor of the latter supposition. 
And this coincides with the opinion, supported by indirect 
evidence of very early antiquity derived from the Old Tes- 
tament and from other sources, that the doctrine of the 
resurrection, or union of soul and body after death, was 
known and cherished by the patriarchs. The striking pas- 
sage in Job xix. 23 — 27, which has so often been appealed 
to on this subject, is of itself satisfactory evidence. 

(95.) Borger, in the work before referred to, p. 135, ad- 
duces the account of the offering of Isaac as a proof that 
the patriarch claimed unlimited power over his son's life. 
But this cannot be supported. It is impossible, indeed, to 
ascertain what was Isaac's age at this period ; but the nar- 
rative contains nothing inconsistent with the opinion, that in 
consequence of representations made by his father, he vol- 
untarily submitted to the divine requisition. And as no 
time seems more favorable for such a disclosure than that in 
which the inquiry was made, we may reasonably presume 
it to have been then communicated. 

(96.) The name given to the place no doubt refers to the 
reply of Abraham to his son. Compare v. 8 and 14. In 
the latter ItS&fc ' which,' is used for "ltp'^5 ' as,' as in Jer. 
xxxiii. 22, and elsewhere ; and the particle of comparison 5 
seems to be omitted before VlIZL, agreeably to ordinary 
usage, of which we have a striking instance in Ps. cxxxix. 
15, "I was made in secret, and curiously wrought (as) in the 
lowest parts of the earth." According to the Rabbinical 
punctuation, to vary from which no good reason can be as- 
signed, the meaning is as follows: 'And Abraham called the 



CHAP.xi.27—xxv.lL] NOTES TO GENESIS. 289 

name of that place, the Lord will provide, as it is said to- 
day, (as) in the mount of the Lord, it shall be provided.' 
It would seem that the language of Abraham, ' God will 
provide, &c.' had given rise to a proverb, expressive of the 
Almighty's interposition for the deliverance of his people in 
difficulties. Nothing could be better adapted to encourage 
such an expectation, than the words by which the patriarch's 
faith had been avowed, when viewed in connexion with the 
result, by which they were so remarkably verified. 

(97.) The infidel objections which have so often been- 
urged against the narrative contained in this chapter, lose 
their force, when the motives by which the divine mind was 
influenced are taken into consideration. The command 
given to Abraham to offer up his son, has been appealed to, 
in order to prove that human sacrifices are recognized in the 
narrative as agreeable to the will of God. But such an in- 
ference is in direct opposition to the whole revealed law, 
and the result in this case affords an argument equally strong 
for the very contrary position. It is a good remark of Le 
Clerc on this portion of sacred history, that it is introduced 
in order to show, that although human victims were not 
offered to God by his true worshippers, yet this did not arise 
from any unwillingness on their part to sacrifice the best and 
dearest. 

Another reason for the transaction under review may be 
found in the very language which introduces it : " God did 
try Abraham." It was intended as a test of his faith ; not, of 
course, for the satisfaction of the Omniscient, nor altogether 
to strengthen and increase the patriarch's habit of virtue ; but 
also to afford an example and a lesson of instruction to all 
succeeding ages. See Rom. xv. 4. Hengstenberg (ubi 
sup. II. p. 139,) supposes, that the command in the second 
verse was not intended to be understood literally ; that a 
37 



290 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part vii. 

spiritual offering of Isaac is all that was required ; that the 
trial lay in the ambiguity of the language employed ; and 
that Abraham misapprehended (p. 146,) the meaning ! But 
this view of the subject is evidently unfounded. The words 
of the command are too plain to allow of misconstruction ; and 
had they admitted the figurative meaning which he ascribes 
to them, the parent's heart would doubtless have prompted 
such an exposition. A spiritual offering of Isaac could 
be nothing more than an entire dedication of him to God's 
service, which the character of the father shows had al- 
ready been done. The objection of this learned writer, that 
God, who can neither lie nor repent, could not afterwards 
have recalled his order, is hardly worthy of notice, as the 
Scripture furnishes us with so many instances of divine 
directions being modified by varying circumstances. His 
other objection is, that what the divine law declared to be 
impious, God cannot have commanded even in the way of 
a trial. But, surely, the divine lawgiver may counteract his 
own law in a case not necessarily involving moral evil, and 
he who has a right to the lives of all may require any one 
to be taken, in whatever manner and by whomsoever he 
pleases. The conduct of God toward Abraham is in some 
respects similar to that of our Lord toward the Canaanitess 
related in Mark vii. 27 ss. In neither case is it right to 
judge of the divine motive, without being governed by a 
view of the divine conduct in the whole transaction. The 
countermanding of the order in the twelfth verse, is neces- 
sarily to be considered, in forming a just conception of the 
motive by which it was originally prompted. 

If it be correct to regard the sacrifice of Christ as pre- 
figured by the intended offering of Isaac, another reason will 
be afforded for this remarkable transaction. It must be 
granted, that no positive declaration to this effect is made in 
Scripture. The language of our Lord in John viii. 56, 



CHAP. XI. 27— XXV. 11. J NOTES TO GENESIS. 291 

" your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he saw 
it and was glad," may indeed have been intended to bear 
upon this fact in the patriarch's life, as well as others which 
the brevity of his history has passed over without notice; 
but it is too indeterminate to justify a positive conclusion. 
And the only other passage which can be supposed to sus- 
tain such a typical relation, Heb. xi. 19, is susceptible of a 
very clear and intelligible exposition, independently of any 
such connexion. The sacred writer may intend to say, that, 
speaking figuratively (iv vagafioXfi) Abraham had originally 
received his son from the dead, referring to the circumstan- 
ces of his birth. Compare Rom. iv. 19, and Heb. xi. 12. Or, 
as appeals to me more probable, he may allude to the situa- 
tion in which Isaac was placed on the occasion under re- 
view, when he was in imminent danger of destruction, and 
rescued, as one m^iy say, from the very jaws of death. But, 
although there is no direct proof afforded by any specific 
declaration of Scripture, from which it may be concluded 
that the sacrifice of Isaac was typical of that of Christ; yet 
the contrary is not hastily to be inferred. May there not be 
a typical relationship which is not explicitly asserted ? May 
it not be left to the pious, candid, and intelligent believer,- to 
ascertain in some cases such relationship by a comparison 
of circumstances, and by the analogy of Scripture 1 Allow- 
ing, as such an one must, the typical character of those per- 
sons and facts which the New Testament so exhibits by 
unequivocal declaration, are we consequently to deny that 
such a character can possibly be maintained of any others ? 
No doubt a multitude of well-meaning writers have run to 
unwarranted extremes on this subject, finding typical asso- 
ciations in minute and most fanciful resemblances, where 
nothing of the sort was intended.* But it is an axiom which 

* I might illustrate this remark, by referring the reader to the so- 
called epistle of Barnabas, among works of antiquity, and among 



292 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part VII. 

no well balanced mind rejects, that the abuse of a principle 
does not take away its legitimate use. So extraordinary a 
fact as that before us would be a fit symbol of that most ex- 
traordinary of all facts, " the offering of the body of Jesus 
Christ once for all." Several similar circumstances might 
be mentioned respecting each, constituting an analogy, cer- 
tainly not less striking than that pointed out in the epistle to 
the Hebrews, between several particulars of the Mosaic 
service and those facts of the Christian dispensation, which 
we are there taught to regard as correspondent. 

(98.) Machpelah seems to have been the name of the 
place, (v. 9, 17,) derived perhaps from the circumstance of 
its containing a double cave : STpSOfa from b&3 to double. — 
It is remarked by Le Clerc, that the length of the sentence 
in the seventeenth and eighteenth versesf and the particu- 
larity with which the land is designated, agree well with the 
supposition, that it is a part of the legal document which 
secured the purchase. 

I cannot acquiesce in the remarks made from a writer in 
the Pictorial Bible by Professor Bush, in his account of the 
transaction of Abraham and the Hittite chief. " This 
Ephron is the first of that nation who comes under our no- 
tice ; and his tone and manner on this occasion do no great 
credit to his tribe. We are not surprised that Ephron's 
respectful and seemingly liberal conduct has been beheld 
favorably in Europe, for only one who has been in the east 
can properly appreciate the rich orientalism it exhibits." 

modern compositions, to Bunyan's Solomon's Temple Spiritualized, or 
to McEwen on the Types. But to show that even a learned and able 
divine may be led away into wild extravagances on this point, I pre- 
fer directing his attention to Vitringa's remarks on the typical charac- 
ter of Joseph and Samson, in his Observationes Sacras, Lib. VI. cap. 
jcxi. xxii. 



CHAP. XI. 27— xxv. 1 1 .] NOTES TO GENESIS. 293 

The affair is then represented as an ostentatious and hypo- 
critical offer of Ephron, arising out of his wish " to lay so 
great a person as Abraham under obligation," with the view 
of " obtaining a present of much more than equal value in 
return." But the patriarch " understands these matters, and 
is not disposed to receive such obligation." The depth of 
his grief on occasion of the death of his long-beloved Sarah, 
does not prevent his conducting himself, in making arrange- 
ments for her suitable interment, with a shrewd and wary 
foresight respecting his pecuniary interests. In plain words, 
the Hittite was a cunning and unfeeling sharper, and Abra- 
ham too knowing a dealer to be deceived by him ! It is 
hard, to make any selfish pretence of generosity which may 
characterize some modern Persians, and the cautious circum- 
spection of an experienced traveller, always apprehensive of 
being overreached, the rule whereby to judge a very an- 
cient Canaanitish tribe, and a generous, open-hearted prince 
like Abraham. 

(99.) It appears from the fiftieth verse, that Laban, Re- 
becca's brother, acts conjointly with her father in relation to 
the proposed marriage. This accords with the influence 
which brothers exercised in disposing of sisters, and is illus- 
trated by the case of Dinah in chap, xxxiv. 11 ss. See also 
Judges xxi. 22. — The phrase " bad or good," in the latter 
clause of the same verse, is equivalent to the Hebraism 
" from good to bad" in xxxi. 24, 29 ; and the meaning is, 
' we have nothing to say on this subject, it is evidently the 
working of Providence.' 

(100.) It would seem, that the constitution of Abraham 
must have been greatly strengthened, if not renovated, since 
the time immediately preceding the last promise of Isaac's 
birth. This supposition appears necessary, in order to re- 



294 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part VII. 



concile the fact of his having so many children by Keturah, 
with the texts referred to in the latter part of note (58,) above. 
That he did not marry her until after Sarah's death, is evi- 
dent from the arrangement of the narrative and the whole 
series of the history. Mr. Bush, in his note on xxv. 1, fol- 
lows some of the older commentators in supposing Keturah to 
have been Abraham's concubine during the life-time of Sarah. 
But the arguments alleged in favor of this opinion do not ap- 
pear to be of much weight. If, on the supposition of her 
having been a second wife, there is any difficulty in her being 
called a concubine in Chronicles, there is, on the other hand, 
a difficulty in her being called his wife in Genesis, on the 
supposition of her having been merely a concubine. " The 
silence of Moses about her pedigree" certainly proves noth- 
ing. It was his great design to show the accomplishment 
of the promise through Isaac ; and, therefore, the mother of 
any other of Abraham's children must be comparatively a 
very insignificant personage in his estimation. The "im- 
probability that Abraham would make an alliance with any 
family of the Canaanites, and that any princess of Canaan 
would accept of him, in his old age, when the whole inheri- 
tance was to go to Sarah's son," no more supports the 
opinion "that Keturah was a concubine," than a wife "taken 
from among the servants of his family." The author asks : 
" was the interval sufficient, between Sarah's death and 
Abraham's, for six sons to be born to him of one woman, 
and grow up to manhood, when manhood hardly took 
place before the age of thirty at soonest V Without stop- 
ping to inquire whether an age of thirty years was necessary 
to the attainment of manhood at that period, it is sufficient 
to reply, that a comparison of xvii. 17, xxiii. 1, and xxv. 7, 
shows that Abraham outlived Sarah thirty-eight years, a 
space of time quite sufficient to satisfy the demand. The 
other objection drawn from his advanced age and corporeal 



CHAP.XI.27-XXV.il.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 295 

debility, shortly before the time of Isaac's birth, is answered 
by allowing that there was " a continuance of his physical 
vigor," in consequence of a miraculous restoration of it. 

The last objection just noted would oblige the Professor 
to allow the birth of these six sons to have taken place be- 
fore that of Isaac. But this is inconsistent with the narra- 
tive, which always represents Abraham as childless until the 
birth of Ishmael, who is afterwards uniformly mentioned as 
his only son until Isaac is born. See xv. 2, xvii. 18 — 21, 
25, 26. 

(101.) Keturah was Abraham's wife in the proper sense 
of the term ; yet she is regarded as inferior to Sarah, whom 
the patriarch first married, and with whom he lived so long, 
and in 1 Chron. i. 32, she is consequently called his concu- 
bine. Her children, therefore, and the son of Hagar, are 
probably the persons intended in the sixth verse. 

Part VIII. Chap. xxv. 12—18, 
(102.) See note (74.) 

Part IX. Chap. xxv. 19 — xxxv. 29. 

(103.) The name Esau, "lip? is derived by many com- 
mentators, both Jewish and Christian, from fitt)^ to make, 
to form, and is thought to express the child's comparatively 
complete formation at the time of his birth, when he is sup- 
posed to have been at least as hairy as a grown man. But 
this seems very strained. It is better to derive the word 

from the Arabic, :ci to be hairy. Esau's other name 
Edom, meaning red, is that by which his posterity are gene- 
rally distinguished. Its origin is stated in v. 30. — Jacob, 



296 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part IX. 

iSpSl is from I2p5 to hold the heel, (compare Hos. xii. 4 ;) 
hence, to supplant, (Gen. xxvii. 36.) 

(104.) The Hebrew is d&l tfi$. Our English transla- 
tion, following probably the Septuagint aifkag-og, and the Vul- 
gate simplex, renders it " a plain man." So also the Geneva 
version, with the marginal note, " simple and innocent." 
Lyra has " simplex" with the note, " sine plica dolositatis !" # 
Cranmer's Bible, more correctly, because exactly accord- 
ing to the original, translates it " a perfect man," as the 
same word, when used of individuals, is often rendered in 
the ordinary version. No doubt the author intends to 
describe Jacob as a religious man. And, in all probability, 
this character of the patriarch is intimated also by the next 
words, " dwelling in tents." This language is sometimes 
used in contradistinction to settlement in a permanent or 
well-fortified residence. Thus in Num. xiii. 19, ''whether 
they dwell in tents or strong holds ;" also in Jer. xxxv. 7, 
"neither shall ye build house, &c, but all your days ye shall 
dwell in tents ;" and again in the ninth and tenth verses^ 
And the author of the epistle to the Hebrews speaks of 
Abraham as " a sojourner in the land of promise, dwelling 
in tents as well as Isaac and Jacob," and contrasts their 
unsettled habitation with the " city that hath foundations, 
whose builder and maker is God." xi. 9, 10. Here it may 
be well to trace some of the prominent features which 
characterize the two brothers, Jacob and Esau. In doing 
this, I shall be guided considerably by the remarks of 
Drechsler in the work already referred to. 

Esau, it would seem, belonged to the class of rough, 

* Such translations naturally suggest the inquiry, whether the au- 
thors did not thereby intend to shield Jacob against the charge of cun- 
ning, which might seem to be founded on some parts of his history. 



chap. xxv. 19— xxxv. 29.] NOTES TO. GENESIS. 297 

sensual natures, men, who, acting under the influence of 
present impulse, have no steadiness of character. They are 
distinguished by an imposing directness of conduct, the very 
opposite to any thing deceitful or cunning. They have 
feeling and kindness ; they readily forget an injury, and 
cherish no malice. These amiable qualities are associated* 
however, with levity, sensuality, and passion, leading to acts 
of violence, as circumstances may prompt. That Esau's 
character was of this nature is evident, as well from the 
advantageous points which his history discloses, as from the 
contrary. Were we to form an opinion of the two brothers 
from one or two insulated facts, we should probably decide 
in favor of the elder. The narrative in chap, xxxiii. 3, 4, 
for instance, considered by itself, is unquestionably much in 
favor of Esau. The one bows himself seven times to the 
ground in the presence of his elder brother; the other, yield- 
ing to the heart's impulse, rushes forward with the fraternal 
embrace. The whole interview shows Esau to have been 
a man of heart and feeling, kindly disposed, glad to do a 
favor, and uninfluenced by any selfish considerations. See 
particularly xxxiii. 9. 

Favorable also to the character of Esau is the statement, 
that when he observed that the choice of his Hittite wives 
was disagreeable to his parents, he endeavored to make a 
more acceptable selection. See xxviii. 9. Hereby, how- 
ever, nothing more is proved than this, that he would not 
openly and boldly oppose his parents. That he consulted 
their wishes does not appear from the narrative, neither is it in 
itself probable, as they would most likely have suggested a 
different choice. And his former union with the Canaani- 
tish women shows, that he lightly appreciated those divine 
directions, by which his father and brother were governed 
in the choice of companions for life. 

If it be asked, what it is that makes Jacob's character so> 
38 



298 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part IX. 

particularly deserving of estimation, the answer is this: 'his 
whole life was spent in the faith of the God of his fathers/ 
It was this divine principle which governed him from his 
earliest years. Even in the purchase of his birthright, un- 
kind and ungenerous as was the act under existing circum- 
stances, it was not without an influence. It was not his own 
personal worldly advantage which he had in view, but 
rather the future prosperity, temporal, spiritual, and eternal, 
of his progeny. Esau, who " despised his birthright," re- 
ceived his possessions earlier than Jacob. He founded a 
nation without subjecting his progeny to any disgrace like 
that which the descendants of Jacob experienced in Egypt. 
But, to be the heir of the promise, to acquire possession of 
Canaan, to be associated with God in Abraham's covenant, — 
this elevated calling was supposed to be connected with the 
rights of the first- born. See xv. 13 — 16. The sensual 
Esau esteemed all this at a very low rate. With him the 
passion of the present moment predominated. Jacob, on 
the other hand, had his thoughts fixed on the divine 
promises, and therefore he obtained the blessing of Abra- 
ham, (xxvii. 28, 29, xxviii. 3, 4, 13, 14,) which, indeed, had 
been secured to him by divine right before his birth, (xxv. 
23 ss.,) and to which he had acquired a human claim by 
purchase, (xxv. 29 ss.,) although in a manner much to be 
censured. 

In order t'o .prepare himself for the accomplishment of 
the divine purpose, he is obliged, partly by adverse cir- 
cumstances, and partly in order to form a matrimonial con- 
nexion with his father's family, to go to Mesopotamia. The 
latter cause is not to be regarded as incidental and of little 
weight, for all such connexion with the nations of Canaan 
was strictly prohibited and carefully guarded against, both 
by Abraham and Isaac. See xxiv. 2 — 9, and xxviii. 1, 2, 6 ; 
and compare xxvii. 46, and xxvi. 25. 



chap. xxv. 19— xxxv. 29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 299 

On his journey to Mesopotamia, Jacob shows his religious 
character, in devoting himself and a reasonable proportion 
of his property to the service of God. See xxviii. 20 — 22. 
While residing with his uncle Laban, who attempted to 
abuse in his person the rights of hospitality and the claims 
of relationship, he commits the prosperity of his enterprises 
to God. xxx. 32, 33, xxxi. 7, 9 — 13, 42. On his return, in 
the apprehension of danger, he trusts to the same almighty 
defence, exercising a religious faith with suitable humil- 
ity, xxxii. 9 — 12. Doubtless he might have settled himself 
advantageously in Mesopotamia, but duty required his return 
to Canaan, and he religiously obeyed the call. xxxi. 3, 13. 
The same character displays itself in the remainder of his 
life. In his old age he undertakes a journey to Egypt, to 
meet his much-loved and long-lost son ; but not until his 
devotions had been favored with the divine answer, and a 
direction to settle there for a season, with the promise that 
his posterity, having there become a great nation, should, by 
the good providence of God, return to Canaan, xlvi. 1 — 4. 
The same religious faith leads him to require from Joseph 
in particular, and again from his sons in general, a solemn 
assurance that his body should be interred in the promised 
land, where his fathers lay, (xlvii. 29 — 31, xlix. 29 — 32,) and 
which he doubted not his descendants would occupy. All this 
is in unison with that religious ardor which prompted the 
language, " I will not let thee go, unless thou bless me." 
xxxii. 26. 

In giving this view of Jacob's religious character, I have 
no intention of vindicating all his conduct. His constitu- 
tional prudence sometimes degenerated into coldness, and 
led him to take advantage of the warmer feelings of his less 
considerate brother. His characteristic shrewdness occa- 
sionally displayed itself in artifice and perhaps deceit. And 
it is not to be denied, that the narrative which describes the 



300 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part ix. 

meeting of the brothers, (xxxiii.) represents the younger in 
a less favorable light than the elder. He is reserved and 
distant ; his manner of approaching his brother is marked 
by that obsequiousness which characterizes the eastern de- 
pendent. Still, it is necessary to consider Jacob's situation, 
in order to form a correct opinion of his behaviour. He had 
good reason to dread a meeting which might expose him to 
his brother's resentment, which he could not be unconscious 
was in some measure deserved. He knew that before his 
flight to Mesopotamia, Esau had resolved on bloody ven- 
geance, xxvii. 41, 42. He knew the rough, passionate na- 
ture of his brother, and feared some hasty ebullition of un- 
guarded temper. Himself less governed by feeling, less 
prompt to hasty action, the peaceable shepherd, many of 
whose years had been spent in the humble situation of a 
servant, conducting a multitude of dependents, children, 
feeble women and unprotected flocks, he could not but trem- 
ble at the approach of an injured brother, who made his 
appearance with an armed force as the independent lord of 
Seir, to trample down, as he might reasonably suppose, the 
servile supplanter, and to crush and scatter his weak and 
defenceless company. Prudence also dictated to Jacob the 
propriety of satisfying his brother that he was in no condi- 
tion to claim rights of primogeniture, and that in him no 
competitor could be expected. He assumes, therefore, 
without hesitation, the deportment of a submissive inferior, 
and acknowledges the elder brother as his "lord Esau." 
The latter, melted into kindness, urges Jacob to continue in 
his company. Well acquainted with Esau's mutability of 
character, knowing that, under different circumstances, his 
good nature and generosity of feeling might turn to over- 
heated passion, and that, forgetful of the past, he might be 
hurried into some hasty and extravagant act, Jacob cau- 
tiously and very prudently declines. He is well aware that 



CHAP.xxv.19— xxxv. 29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 301 

the brotherly feeling of the mighty chieftain of Edom might 
rapidly pass away, " like the morning cloud, or the early 
dew." 

The conduct of Jacob, as related in xxx. 25 — 43, has been 
the occasion of no little animadversion. He has . been ac- 
cused of overreaching his mother's brother by deceit and 
artifice. If the contents of this portion of the chapter 
could be viewed in no other light than this, then, indeed, there 
would be a great difficulty to resolve, namely, to account 
for such a procedure being related in the Bible. Certainly 
it does not comport with the object of this sacred book, to 
relate instances of cunning merely for the purpose of amuse- 
ment. It does, indeed, mention the frailties and sins of holy 
men, but always with some definite object in view. The 
falsehood of Abraham and Isaac in denying their wives, the 
imposition which Jacob was induced to practise on his blind 
and aged father, David's infamous conduct in the affair of 
Bathsheba, have all a historical and moral and religious 
bearing. But what could lead to the introduction of an 
account of such a crafty device as this is asserted to have 
been ? In order rightly to understand such a portion of the 
Bible as that under consideration, it is necessary to have 
right views of the character of the Bible. That exposition 
must necessarily rest on an erroneous basis, which assumes 
that the sacred writer could have in view any other than a 
sacred purpose ; that he could, by any possibility, have in- 
tended to exhibit a well planned and successful piece of 
cunning, or some remarkable lusus naturae, brought forward 
on account of its extreme rarity. Such views are abhorrent 
to every well-ordered and serious mind. 

Jacob is treated most unrighteously by the selfish Laban, 
and reduced to extremity. The narrative relates the par- 
ticulars. His own conduct had been in all respects unex- 
ceptionable and honorable, and divine Providence had blessed 



302 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part IX. 

his hard labors, increased his gains, and thus inflicted merited 
punishment on the churlish Laban. In the arrangement 
which constitutes the ground of objection, Jacob proposes 
that the only wages to be received by him shall be the re- 
sult of circumstances, which were altogether beyond the 
reach of human reasoning and calculation, much more of 
human action. Whatever light modern inquiries in physi- 
ology may throw on the phenomena in contemplation, by 
alleging instances of the wonderful power of imagination on 
the female when in the circumstances suggested in the text, 
it is hardly to be supposed, that Jacob's knowledge of the 
mysteries of nature could have been so profound as to lead 
him, of his own accord, to adopt the course related, particu- 
larly as he risked his very subsistence on a result, which, 
considered as a natural effect merely, he could not but have 
known to be extremely problematical. Surely, it was the pat- 
riarch's childlike, implicit faith in the divine direction, com- 
municated to him in the ordinary manner, which impelled 
his conduct. Compare xxxi. 9 — 12. See farther on this 
subject in note (118.) 

(105.) The privileges of the birthright consisted in pre- 
cedence over the other brothers, and a double patrimony. 
See Gen. xlix. 3, 4, Deut. xxi. 17, 1 Chron. v. 1, 2. To this 
some add the right of the priesthood. The opinion is cer- 
tainly of very high antiquity, as it is expressly stated in the 
Chaldee Targum on Gen. xlix. 3, where the priestly authority 
is mentioned as that part of Reuben's rights of primogeniture 
which fell to the tribe of Levi. See the Note on that text. 
It is supposed also by most Jewish and Christian commen- 
tators, that " the priests" mentioned in Exod. xix. 22, and the 
" young men" in xxiv. 5, are the first-born, who being con- 
secrated to God, (see xiii. 2,) became priests, in place of 
whom the Levites were afterwards substituted. Num. iii. 



CHAP. XXV. 19— XXXV. 29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 303 

45. But the argument assumes the very points in dispute, 
namely, that the consecration of the first-born was an in- 
vesting of them with the priesthood, and that the priests 
and young men referred to were identical with the first- 
born, neither of w T hich can be proved. Besides, the Le- 
vites who took the place of the first-born, were not 
priests, but only attendants or servants of the sanctuary ; 
and " the priesthood" which they are said " to receive," 
in Heb. vii. 5, (if, indeed, the whole body of Levites are 
there intended, which it is impossible to prove,) must be 
understood in a limited sense. That Esau is called " a 
profane person," (Heb. xii. 16,) for thus parting with his 
birthright, would indeed be clearly explicable on the ground 
that the priestly office made a part of it. But it is equally 
so, if the rights of primogeniture were regarded in the pat- 
riarchal age as comprehending any spiritual blessings ; which 
it would be unreasonable, and in opposition to the general 
representations of Scripture, to deny. If the expected de-' 
liverer were supposed to be a descendant from the eldest 
son, Esau's profanity in despising the honor of being ances- 
tor of such an offspring, requires no illustration. It is little 
less than despising the benefits which were expected to 
flow from this personage. His readiness in yielding to his 
brothers proposition, and the sentiment along with which 
he expresses his determination, shows clearly enough that 
his views were limited to personal gratification. " I am at 
the point to die, and what profit shall this birthright do to 
me ?" It is not to be supposed, that Esau was in danger of 
immediate death for want of food in his father's house : his 
language is of that extravagant hyperbolical character, 
which could be occasioned by nothing less than a vehement 
desire for the food before him, and a very low estimate of 
the value of the price demanded for it. The subject of the 
priesthood, considered as one of the rights of primogeniture, 



304 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part IX. 

is ably discussed by Vitringa, and settled in the negative, in 
his Observationes Sacrse, Lib. II. cap. ii. iii. p. 271 — 300. 
Buddseus, ubi sup. Per. I. sect. iii. p. 389 ss., has taken 
some notice of his Dissertation, without succeeding, however, 
in refuting his arguments. 

(106.) Beer, *"l$3, means a well, and 3?5ti, to swear, 
whence FWitB an oath: 5?5tp is the word for seven. The 
oath is no doubt the principal circumstance giving rise to 
the name. This is plain from the language in xxi. 31 ; 
" therefore he called the name of that place, Beer Sheba, 
25$ ^&0, (without the athnach 25 1 ® ;) because there they 
sware, ^iZltipJ, both of them. " Still, as Hengstenberg re- 
marks, neither 23tp nor »125V ever means oath. He con- 
siders the bringing of seven sheep as the usual symbol, by 
means of which the compact and oath were ratified; so that 
both phrases are equivalent. See his Authentic des Penta- 
teuches, I. p. 277. 

(107.) The ardent attachment of Isaac to his elder son 
doubtless strengthened his natural desire, that the divine 
blessing should flow to posterity through him. The same 
preference of the elder son appears in the case of Joseph. 
See Gen. xlviii. 17, 18. It is reasonable to think, that Re- 
becca's particular affection for Jacob confirmed her in the 
impression, that he was destined to become the more distin- 
guished of her two children. Indeed, the prediction made 
to her before they were born, no doubt gave her mind a 
bias especially favorable to Jacob, which would naturally 
be increased by his domestic habits. Perhaps she saw in 
her husband an undue partiality for the elder brother ; and, 
apprehensive of its consequences in diverting the blessing 
from the intended channel, may have supposed herself justi- 
fied in resorting to the crafty expedients which the narrative 



chap. xxv. 19— xxxv. 29.] NOTES TO GENESIS, 305 

recounts. The lawfulness of religious frauds, as such at- 
tempts to advance the cause of God have by a strange 
misnomer been called, has been maintained- by some men of 
the very highest distinction in the Christian church, from at 
very early age. It is not therefore to be assumed that Re- 
becca had clear ideas of obligation in all points, and conse- 
quently our censures of her conduct ought to be modified 
by a correct view of her religious and moral knowledge. 
Certainly the divine promise needed no deceitful efforts, 
either on the part of Jacob or his mother, to verify its ac- 
complishment; non talibus auxiliis. Neither human "wrath" 
nor human cunning is necessary to " work the righteousness 
of God." James i. 20. 

It is much to be lamented, that both Jewish and Christian 
writers of authority have too often attempted to vindicate, 
or at least greatly to excuse, certain conduct of the patri- 
archs and other personages of Scripture, as if their gene- 
ral faith and piety stamped correctness on every action of 
their lives. Miserable are the subterfuges by which it has 
been attempted to elicit morality and truth, from cunning 
hypocrisy and falsehood. Thus, for example, Aben Ezra, in 
commenting on this portion of Genesis, attempts to vindi- 
cate falsehood on occasion of necessity, (W2) "TVi^b,) by 
appealing to David's declaration to Abimelech, " the vessels 
of the young men are holy," (1 Sam. xxi. 5 ;) to Elisha's 
message to the king of Syria, " go, say unto him, thou wilt 
certainly recover," (2 Kings viii. 10,) although his meaning 
is, as is afterwards expressed, " the Lord hath showed me 
that he shall surely die ;" to Micaiah's language to Ahab, 
"go and prosper," (1 Kings xxii. 15 ;) to DaniePs address to 
Nebuchadnezzar, " my lord, the dream be to them that hate 
thee," (Dan. iv. 19.) And Rashi's comment, though brief, 
according to his manner, very evidently makes the language 

of Jacob an equivocation: " ~\Wl *fi ^">i^t! '%W ^^ 
39 



306 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part IX. 



'"p"DS WlJl, I Esau :* who bring to thee, and Esau, he is 
thy first-born ;" that is, ' I am bringing thee the food, and 
Esau is thy eldest son.'f And not only do Jews of the 
middle ages make these wretched efforts to remove their 
great ancestor's criminality ; but a most distinguished Chris- 
tian father of the fourth century labors with Jesuitical so- 
phistry to free him and his mother from censure, and to re- 
present their conduct as worthy of praise. The golden- 
mouthed patriarch of Constantinople employs the force of 
his eloquence to give weight to the opinion, which others 
before him had advanced, that, as the frauds in question did 
not proceed from any inclination to do mischief, but were 
subservient to the attainment of the highest good, the prin- 
cipals in conducting them are rather entitled to approbation 
than obnoxious to censure. Thus, in his fifty-third Homily 
on Genesis, (chap, xxvii.) Tom. IV. p. 515, of the Benedictine 
edition, he says : ; 0£a ^-nr^og <pi\o<frogylav, ^xk\ov Ss 8eov oixovop- 
iav dvrog yag 5yv xai rauT/jv rfgog rr,v tfufju/SouX^v hisysipuv, xai to 
tfav xcLTo^u^tYjvai tfoiwv " See the greatness of the mother's 
love, or rather the dispensation of God. For he it was who 
excited her to (give) the counsel, and who made the whole 
matter successful." And afterwards he speaks of her act- 
ing ' not from the impulse of her own opinion merely, but 
under a prompting from above,' avwdsv and again, p. 516, of 
* her and Jacob doing what was proper (or necessary, 

* These two words are the text, the comment follows. 

f It is worthy of notice, that Cartwright, after rejecting the erro- 
neous gloss of Rashi, and noting with disapprobation the attempt of 
Lyra to free Jacob from the charge of falsehood, by saying, that in office 
and dignity respecting the right of primogeniture, Jacob was Esau, does 
himself make the remark, that " if Jacob had only said, I am the first- 
born, he might perhaps be excusable : sane si tantum dixisset, ego sum 
primogenitus, excusari forsan potuisset; et cum dixerit, ego sum Esau, 
frustra quseritur excusatio." What views could these theologians have 
had of the nature of falsehood ? 



CHAP.xxv.19— xxxv.29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 307 

*Xfw) to be done, and of the most difficult part of all, the 
concealment of the fraud from Isaac, being effected by the 
good Lord's co-operation/ And then, as his hearer might 
well be supposed to ask whether God lent his aid to such a 
falsehood, he kindly cautions him ' not to be too inquisitive 
about the fact, but to attend to the design in view, which 
was not the acquisition of any temporal advantage, but the 
paternal benediction :' p^ air\^g igirags to yivopsvw, ayutfyrs, 
aXXct rov tfxotfov xa-ra/xavSavs, xou ra a. 

It should never be forgotten, that the characters who 
stand out in such bold relief in the pages of sacred Scrip- 
ture, are represented as men, weak and sinful like ourselves. 
The inspired historian does not indeed stop, in his narrative, 
to express any opinion respecting the moral character of the 
actions he records ; but we are not on this account to sup- 
pose that he meant to justify them, any more than we should 
infer from a similar silence that the Evangelists did not con- 
demn the act of crucifying our Lord. It was not the writer's 
object to comment on the character of the action ; but ra- 
ther to give a true picture of human nature, and to illustrate 
the divine influence in accomplishing God's schemes, not- 
withstanding the natural unfitness of the agency by means 
of which they were advanced. And yet the judgment of 
the author, and even the divine judgment, are readily dis- 
cernible by the attentive reader in the history itself. The 
acquiescence of Abraham in the advice of Sarah, whereby 
he betrays a want of that implicit reliance on the divine 
promise by which he was generally characterized, is fol- 
lowed by consequences which for a time were fatal to his 
domestic peace. Jacob's conduct on the present occasion 
meets with its merited retribution in the treatment which he 
afterwards receives from Laban ; and Rebecca, in that long 
and anxious separation from her favorite, which must in a 
good degree have embittered her life. And to this it may 



308 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part ix. 

be proper to add, that if the sacred writer relates these oc- 
currences without any expression of censure, he sometimes 
stamps upon them the seal of his reprobation, when, in a 
subsequent part of his work, he has occasion to refer back 
to them. Of this we have a striking instance in the horror 
with which the dying Jacob regards the incestuous conduct 
of his eldest son, and the wanton cruelty of two of the 
others. See xlix. 4 — 7. The success which attended Re- 
becca's crafty project is no more an impeachment of the 
divine wisdom and goodness, than are many other results 
which the providence of God allows to crown the efforts of 
ambitious and selfish hypocrisy. All events of this kind do 
but confirm the truth, that human frailty and passion are 
made subservient to the divine will. 

(108.) For the various meanings assigned to the word 
Til?!, see Rosenmiiller and Dathe in loc, and particularly 
Schroeder, in his Observationes ad Origines Hebrasas, cap. 
j, § 9. See also Gesenius under HTI, No. 2. 

(109.) Compare Note (57.) 

(110.) The doctrine of a particular providence, extending 
on suitable occasions even so far as to miraculous influence, 
seems plainly intimated by the symbol of the ladder and the 
angels, and the allusion to it made by our Lord in reference 
to himself in John i. 51. The instruction and consolation 
thus afforded to Jacob could not have been conveyed by any 
more appropriate emblem. The notion, that the doctrine of 
angels, either good or bad, is of Babylonian or Persian orir 
gin, and was incorporated into Jewish theology after the 
captivity, is utterly irreconcilable with Scripture ; and, if 
admitted, would destroy the credibility of the Old Testa- 
ment history. Nothing can be clearer, than that the au- 
thors represent the patriarchs themselves, and the Hebrew 



chap. xxv. 19— xxxv.29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 309 

worthies in general, as believing in the existence of angels, 
and recognizing their influence in human affairs. 

(111.) The erection of pillars for religious purposes, and 
anointing them with oil, is of high antiquity. They receiyed 
the name of (3a&6\ia, probably from b&~£T!5, and are men- 
tioned occasionally as animated stones. See Clement of 
Alexandria, Strom. Lib. VII. p. 713, Sylburg's edition, and 
Sanconiathon in Eusebius, Evang. Prep. Lib. I. cap. x. 
p. 37, Cologne edition, 1688. Jacob raises his pillar merely 
as commemorative ; but the heathen paid to theirs a species 
of divine adoration. See Rosenmuller in loc, and particu- 
lar his Alte und Neue Morgenland, Vol. I. p. 125 — 128. — 
The twentieth verse does not imply indecision in Jacob's 
purpose. Since God had promised to bless him, he vows 
obedience as an expression of his gratitude. 

According to the Masoretical accentuation, which is fol- 
lowed by our English translation, the patriarch's vow com- 
mences with the latter clause of the twenty-first verse : " then 
shall the Lord be my God." And certainly the sense is 
good and clear ; ' I will devote myself to the service of Je- 
hovah,' in contradistinction to that of any false God. In the 
opinion of Hengstenberg, however, (ubi sup. p. 370, 371,) 
this clause precedes the commencement of the vow, thus : 
1 Since God will be with me, &c. — and Jehovah is my God ; 
this stone, &c.' He argues in favor of this construction 
from the tense of »T)i11, whereas the following verbs «f?«T! 
and "lEJ?^ are future in their form. This is of little mo- 
ment, as the vau is conversive. But, to declare as part of a 
vow, that Jehovah should be one's God, that the benefitted 
party would accept him as protector and Lord, is not accor- 
dant with scriptural usage, which always, as the author 
says, embodies the grateful feeling in some outward action. 
Besides, the thirteenth verse seems to confirm this construe- 



310 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part IX. 

tion : " I am the God of Abraham, thy father, and the God 
of Isaac." This illustrates the language of Jacob : ' since 
Jehovah is to me what he declared himself to have been to 
Abraham and Isaac ;' and it is confirmed by the declaration 
in the fifteenth verse, " I am with thee, and will keep thee in 
all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again to 
this land." The last clause, ' and Jehovah is my God,' con- 
centrates, as it were, all that the holy man had just said, im- 
plying guidance, protection, security, and happy restoration 
to the promised land, and the paternal home. 

(112.) Michaelis supposes that Jacob received Leah at 
the commencement of the seven stipulated years, and that 
the chronology requires this admission. Usher, in his chro- 
nology, and Junius and Tremellius in their note on this 
place, maintain the same opinion. So also Richardson, 
Bishop of Ardagh, in his very useful " Observations upon 
the Book of Genesis," London, 1655, on v. 20. But the 
language of the twenty-first verse is evidently unfavorable 
to this view. It is very harsh to render 'W ^bfa, as the 
last mentioned author does, " my days are filled or filling 
up," that is, I am advancing in age ; or, with the first, ' I 
am quite marriageable, and can no longer defer making such 
a connexion, unless I forego the hope of having a family.' 
Whatever Jacob's age may have been at this time, we 
know he must have lived fifty years beyond it, when he was 
presented to Pharaoh, (compare xlvii. 9, with xlv. 6, xli. 
47, 46, xxxi. 41, and xxx. 25 ss. ;) and it is evident, that 
neither his age nor constitution and habits correspond with 
such a construction. Besides, the Hebrew will not bear 
it. The ordinary phrase to express advanced age is, 
fr^S &£ *]pT. See Josh. xiii. 1, xxiii. 2, 1 Kings i. 1, and 
a similar form in 1 Sam. xii. 2. Jfcbfa, when used in con- 






chap .xxv. 19— xxxv.29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 311 

nexion with time, means ' to fill up, expire, complete,' desig- 
nating accomplishment or end, never advancement or pro- 
gress. Tims 1 Sam. xviii. 26, " the days were not expired, 
^fcOft," that is, the time appointed had not come to an end ; 
Levit. xii. 4, " until the days of her purifying have expired 
FlSib??-'"]? ;" xxv. 30, " until the expiration tiaibfcr 1 !? of a 
full year ;" Num. vi. 5, 13 ; Jer. xxv. 34, " for your days — are 
accomplished," or expired, E?^. ^fcOfa -1 ?) ; also xxix. 10 ; 
Dan. x. 3. There are no exceptions to this meaning. In 
Jer. vi. 11, "the aged with O 1 ^ £$bfa" signifies 'with him 
who has accomplished his days,' as we -would say, is just ex- 
piring, not him who is advancing in age ; so also Lam. iv. 
18. In 2 Sam. vii. 12, and the parallel place 1 Chron. xvh. 
11, the phrase "when thy days be fulfilled" or "expired" 
means, ' when thy life is ended,' as the words immediately 
following prove. The view given by Michaelis and Rich- 
ardson is not supported by usage. The chronological dif- 
ficulties alluded to must therefore be removed in some 
other way. 

(113.) The term " hated" in v. 31 is comparative, imply- 
ing very inferior regard, as the preceding verse intimates ; 
and in this sense it is often used in Scripture. See Luke 
xiv. 26 : " if any man come to me and hate not his father, 
&c." ; Rom. ix. 13, compared with Mai. i. 3 : "Jacob have I 
loved, but Esau have I hated ;" and Deut. xxi. 15 — 17 : " if 
a man have two wives, one beloved and another hated." 

(114.) Reuben, 1 5 ^^0> means literally, ' see a son;' but 
the former part of the name is not the ordinary word for 
'see, behold,' (although it is occasionally so used, as in xxxix. 
14,) which is HSn, and the context shows that it alludes to 
the Lord's having seen the mother's affliction. When the 



312 NOTiJS TO GENESIS. [part ix. 

slighted and mortified Leah became the mother of a son, 
she cried out, under a feeling of the triumph which, (ac- 
cording to the spirit of the time and people,) she supposed 
herself to have gained, " see, a son !" and this name she im- 
poses on the infant, as a lasting monument of her own honor 
and a disgrace to her competitor for the husband's favor : 
" for she said, surely the Lord hath looked upon my affliction, 
^5^3 iliit! 5l^*Y-* h 5' I n those words, she does not refer to 
the name Reuben, the derivation and meaning of which are 
clear enough of themselves, but to the fact of her being 
permitted to make the declaration, to the painful reminis- 
cences which were connected with the name. Her lan- 
guage contains a paronomasia, and adheres as closely as 
possible to the origin of the former part of the word and the 
sound of the latter. Any other connexion of the words is 
not to be thought of. 

Thus, for substance, Drechsler, ubi sup. p. 212, 213. He 
proceeds to add : ' How ridiculously pedantic, then, for lex- 
icographers of the nineteenth century seriously to examine 
whether Leah's words are consistent with conjugation and 
declension." No doubt he alludes to Gesenius, who, under 
the word "ll 7 !^, remarks as follows : " See ye, a son ! 
although the author of Genesis, in xxix. 32, seems to ex- 
plain the name as being for V021ZL- h^JS^j] ^fcO provided for 
my affliction." The language of the critic will hardly be 
considered too caustic, when we reflect that the lexicogra- 
pher's remark seems to imply ignorance on the part of the 
Hebrew author himself. 

Simeon, li^)?'©, is from 9fatf 'to hear;' and it implies 
Leah's domestic calamity, and also her belief that the Lord 
had not forgotten her. Levi, "Hi, from !T]j 'to join,' denotes 
the union of heart which the tried, yet happy mother hopes 
may result. Judah, ul^rp, from fiT in Hiphil, ' to praise, 



CHAP.xxv.19— xxxv.29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 313 

expresses her gratitude to God, in which every other con- 
sideration seems to be absorbed. 



(115.) Dan is derived from the root VH, 'to judge,' mean- 
ing, to espouse the cause of, as where God is said to " judge 
his people ;" and where it is commanded to " judge the 
fatherless." See Heb. x. 30, Deut. xxxii. 36, Isa. i. 17. — 
Naphthali is a word formed from the root bflS, ' to strive, 
wrestle,' implying that she had used all her efforts to equal 
her sister, and had succeeded. 

(116.) The word H}?* according to the reading in the 
margin "ft !&£, means ' good fortune comes ;' according to 
that in the text, with a slight change in the punctuation of 
the first letter, it signifies, ' with good fortune,' that is, ' hap- 
pily, auspiciously,' sv ru^, as it is in the Septuagint. The 
sense of " troop" is unsupported. In Gen. xlix. 19, the simi- 
larity of H3 and T^l^ is the sole ground of the alliteration. 
Compare v. 29. — -In the thirteenth verse, our translators have 
followed the Septuagint, paxagia syu- the literal version of 
the Hebrew is, ' with,' or * for my happiness' ; that is, the 
birth of this son will contribute to it. 

(117.) ^bW or *Dfcip'? is probably contracted from 
"Ofe »fc\ < will bring hire.' 

(118.) The paronomasia is a favorite figure with the He- 
brews, and may often be traced in the application of names* 
And if this play upon a word comprehends an allusion to 
more ideas than one, it is considered as so much the more 
spirited. Hence it is that Rachel, at the birth of her first 
son, applies the term Joseph in a two-fold respect ; in part, 
as she connects with him the wish, that the Lord may add. 
40 



314 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part IX. 



yet one more, flfl& ^ i*> rrirfi C|tD\) xxx. 24, and in part, 
as she combines q§"P with q§& in the former verse, " God 
hath taken away my reproach." The reader who examines 
the two verses carefully, will see that neither of them can 
be removed without injuring the sense, which requires the 
ideas conveyed by both to be combined. 

The combination in the latter clause of v. 20 is of a still 
freer kind. Leah calls her son Zebulon, in order to bring in 
a paronomasia of b^T to dwell with, and 1!SLj to endow. 
See the former part of the verse. 

(119.) " Ten times ;" that is, often, a definite for an inde- 
finite number. See Num. xiv. 22. — The Septuagint has 
twv dsxa dfxvuv, far an explanation of which see Schleusner's 
Lexicon in Septuaginta under u^vog* 

(120.) As the latter part of v. 13, " now arise, &c." can- 
not be a direction given to Jacob at the time of the dream 
just mentioned, v. 10, &c, it is probable, that it is a repeti- 
tion, made by Jacob to his wives, of that mentioned in the 
third verse. 

Perhaps it may be thought by some readers, that the sub- 
ject of this dream of Jacob is of such a nature, as to be in- 
consistent with the supposition of a divine communication. 
To remove the difficulty, it has been said, that the whole 
occurrence is nothing but a dream ; that Jacob's mind, 
dwelling on Laban's unworthy attempts to injure him, na- 
turally revolved the matter even in sleep; that the strate- 
gem thus occurring to him in the ordinary progress of 
thought, while in this state, is ascribed by him to God's 
angel, on the cherished supposition, that whatever tended to 
his welfare originated with that divine being to whose service 
he had devoted himself; or else, on another principle, that 



CHAP.xxv.19— xxxv.29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 315 

whatever is allowed in the providence of God is, in scrip- 
tural language, ascribed to God himself. Although the 
principle and supposition are both true ; and, although it 
should be granted, that the waking emotions of Jacob might 
have suggested to his mind while asleep such an idea as the 
narrative conveys ; the interpretation offered by this view 
of the matter cannot be admitted. Any other view than 
that of a divine communication in the ordinary sense of the 
words, is inconsistent with the language of the text. The 
natural thoughts of the mind, whether the party be awake 
or asleep, are never expressed in language like this : " and 
the angel of God spake unto me, &c. ;" while, on the other 
hand, this language is entirely analogous to that elsewhere 
employed to denote divine communications. These are 
sometimes ascribed to God, sometimes to the Lord, and 
sometimes to the angel of God or of the Lord. It cannot 
then be denied, that such a communication is here intended. 
Neither, indeed, is the nature of it inconsistent with this 
belief. It is no more derogatory to the purity and dignity 
of the divine being, to admit that he made such a communi- 
cation in an extraordinary way, in order to effect one part 
of his great scheme by increasing the wealth and reputation 
of the patriarch, than it would be to admit that Providence 
allowed him, by a close observation of nature, to perceive 
the bearing and influence of external circumstances in pro- 
ducing such a result as the narrative mentions. The opera- 
tions of nature are the effects of the laws which the God of 
nature has imposed on his works ; and it cannot possibly be 
inconsistent with the purity and dignity of the lawgiver, to 
allow that he may disclose those laws in any method most 
agreeable to him, whenever, in his wisdom, important ends 
are thereby to be answered. 

(121.) Some commentators remark that Laban ought to 



316 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part IX. 

have allowed his two daughters the value of Jacob's four- 
teen years' service as their dowry. The ordinary usage 
seems to have been, for the son-in-law to give a dowry to 
the father. See xxxiv. 12, 1 Sam. xviii. 23, 25, 27. It is 
said, however, that occasionally the father paid one. See 
Jahn's Archaeology, § 153. The language of Laban's 
daughters is quite explicable on the ground of their father's 
contemptible and unnatural behaviour. 

(122.) For an account of these images, see the commen- 
tators, particularly Drusius, (in the Critici Sacri,).on v. 19, 
notse majores, and De Muis: also, Calmet's Dictionary under 
the word. He gives a view of the absurd notions of some 
of the Jewish rabbins ' on the nature and uses of the tera- 
phim ; and Buxtorf, in his Talmudic Lexicon, (col. 2660 — 4,) 
quotes largely from these writers. The teraphim were 
probably a sort of household gods, stolen by Rachel from 
superstitious and perhaps idolatrous motives. Compare 
xxxv. 2, 4. 

(123.) Jegar sahadutha is Syriac, and of the same im- 
port as Galeed in Hebrew, that is, ' heap of witness,' heap 
which attests. Parkhurst under IN contends, that the for- 
mer words are Hebrew, meaning, " may the witness of the 
appointed bounds (be) a terror (to us.)" He follows Julius 
Bate's New and Literal Translation. Compare his Critica 
Hebrsea, or Hebrew and English Dictionary, under ^liTlD. 
But the form of the words allows no such signification. 
They are pure Syriac, exactly equivalent to the Hebrew 
used by Jacob. Mizpah, the other name, means ' watch- 
tower.' See the Lexicons. — In v. 53, the clause, " the God 
of their father," is probably the parenthetical remark of the 
author. This is the opinion of Aben Ezra, in which Rosen- 



CHAP.xxv.]9— xxxv.29.] NOTES TO GENESIS, 317 

mtiller acquiesces. Considered as the language of Laban, 
it embarrasses the sentence. 



(124.) The notion of De Wette and some other German 
rationalists, that this narrative is a historical mythus, that is v 
a fiction, invented to give a reason for the name Mahanaim, 
which occurs in Jos. xx. 38, is unworthy of serious refuta- 
tion. Why should a reason of this sort be devised to ac- 
count for this particular name, while a multitude of others 
equally significant and important, are unaccounted for ? 

(125.) Septuagint : oVs svio^utfas fxsra SsS, xui ixsra dv^Putfuv 
Swaros sty Vulgate : quoniam si contra Deum fortis fuisti, 
quanto majis contra homines praevalebis. Rosenmuller re- 
marks after Le Clerc, that STltB never has the sense of 
strength or victory. That may be, and yet the idea may be 
implied from the circumstances in which the word is used : 
ittT means to dwell, and yet it sometimes implies the idea 
of security ; Ejl?5 means to fight, but in 2 Kings xvi. 5, and 
Isa. vii. 1, it expresses prevailing in war. The English 
translation of jTHtp "as a prince hast thou power," combines 
the meaning of the verb with that of 1W a prince, following 
the Chaldee Targum, which has, " for a prince art thou be- 
fore Jehovah." Jerome also, in his Questions on Genesis, 
Tom. II. Col. 536, Paris. 1699, (or as cited by Drusius in 
loc.,) gives the same view. There may be an intended 
allusion to the meaning of T©, but this is by no means ne- 
cessary or certain. The sense suggested by the Septuagint 
and Vulgate versions, is probably the true one : ' thou hast 
prevailed (contended successfully) with God, much more 
shalt thou be mighty against men.' The term Israel is 
therefore expressive of extraordinary distinction in opposi- 



318 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part IX. 

tion to that of Jacob, a supplanter. See Hos. xii. 3, 4 ; 1 
Kings xviii. 31 ; 2 Kings xvii. 34. 

(126.) The word 3>pin in v. 26, is rendered in our trans- 
lation, " was out of joint." Inasmuch, however, as this is 
the only place in which it is supposed to have this meaning, 
which seems also to be hardly compatible with the circum- 
stances of the case, I cannot but doubt the correctness of 
the version. The idea of being contracted, drawn away, 
hanging loose from, the cavity of the thigh, suits the con- 
text, and is in analogy with the signification in which the 
word is elsewhere used. It occurs but nine times, in addi- 
tion to the text : in Kal and Niphal in Jer. vi. 8, Ezek. xxiii. 
17, 18, 22, 28 ; and in Hiphil and Hophal in Num. xxv. 4, 
2 Sam. xxi. 6, 9, 13. In all these texts, it has the sense of 
being alienated from, or of hanging. — On the Jewish usage 
to abstain from the part referred to, the Talmud contains 
several precepts. See the Treatise IvlH, on profane 
things, chap. vii. Mishna, edition of Surenhusius, Part V. p. 
140—142. 

(127.) The word "blessing" in v. 11, is equivalent to 
" present" in v. 10, and is often used in this sense. See 1 
Sam. xxv. 27. 

(128.) By comparing v. 12 and 14, it seems that Esau in- 
vited Jacob to accompany him to Seir. Whether Jacob in- 
tended to follow his brother there, and was afterwards 
induced to change his mind, and whether, at any subsequent 
period, he went or not. we are not informed. The difficul- 
ties which must have impeded the further migration of so 
numerous a family, with all that belonged to them, and es- 
pecially the divine direction to return to Canaan, (xxxi. 13,) 



CHiP.xxv.19-xxxv.29. J NOTES TO GENESIS. 319 

are sufficient to account for his avoiding such a journey, 
without supposing that he still apprehended hostility on the 
part of his brother. 

(129.) Interpreters, both ancient and modern, differ in 
translating the first clause of the eighteenth verse. The 
Targum and other highly respectable authorities, consider 
the word " shalem" as an adjective, meaning safe (or safely,) 
as it is used in Nahum i. 12, analogous to its ordinary sense 
of sound, perfect. So Dathe, Augusti, Rosenmiiller, and 
Gesenius. Thus it may refer to the recovery of Jacob's 
thigh, to the safety of his family and property, and, in gene- 
ral, to his deliverance from the various dangers to which he 
had been exposed. " dblB : sound in his body, which had 
recovered of its halting ; sound in his property, which had 
not diminished ; sound in his religion, which he had not ne- 
glected during his residence with Laban." Rashi. " d312) 
is an adjective ; and the meaning is, that he came safe, that 
no unfortunate event had occurred to him : for he had not 
yet recorded the affair of Dinah." Aben Ezra. Drechsler 
supposes also a reference to the language of Jacob's con- 
ditional vow in xxviii. 21. "Here," says he, "is a great 
point in the patriarch's life. The dark hours of foreign pil- 
grimage and service are succeeded by the bright day of glo- 
riously accomplished promise. He had said, " so that I 
come again to my father's house in peace, dibttJ3 ; now he 
comes dbtf to Sichem." p. 147. But if such a reference 
were intended, I should suppose that the same word would 
have been employed in both places. — Others again, follow- 
ing the Septuagint and Vulgate, explain the word as the 
name of the city in the vicinity of which he settled. Thus 
our English translation, and also the German of Luther. I 
am strongly disposed to believe that this is right; other- 



320 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part ix. 

wise the name of the city is not designated, and such an 
omission is unusual. Shechem is the name of the man who 
makes so prominent a figure in the subsequent chapter. This 
is proved by the next verse, and the repeated use of the 
word in the narrative which immediately follows ; although 
it is true that there was a place which bore the same name. 
See xxxvii. 12 ss. The translation in the Septuagint is, 
Shalem, a city- of the Sichemites, tfoXiv 2ixi>6jv, and that of 
the Vulgate, urbem Sichemorum. Rosenmiiller's and Dathe's 
"venit Sichemum," "pervenit Sichemum," (meaning the city 
Sichem,) are inadmissible ; as, in such cases, the usage re- 
quires the article before the word city, as in Esther iii. 15, 
and viii. 15, ^tthtf T?H. In the text it is simply Dp® T? 
without the article, and I think it ought not to be rendered 
'the city Shechem,' but, 'a city of Shechem,' or 'Shechem's 
city,' that is, a place under the government of this person, 
who is immediately afterwards called " the prince of the 
country," xxxiv. 2. This, I believe, agrees with the invaria- 
ble usage. Thus we have in Num. xxi. 28, ilTO try] ft £ 
from Sihorfs city ; and in Samuel and Chronicles, David 1 s 
city is always ^Rl T? or "P'Vl, never T?<1. If, therefore, 
Shalem is not the name of a place, no city is specified ; 
unless, indeed, the phrase ' Shechem's city' were in the au- 
thor's age sufficiently definite for this purpose. As this may 
be so, I have thought it best to rdtain the expression safely, 
in the Analysis. Whether this is implied in the original 
word or not, it is no doubt implied in the narration. 

I find, after writing this note, that Mendelsohn's translation 
is : " Jacob came safely to Shechem's city." 

(130.) The literal translation of the last clause is : ' and 
he called it God, the God of Israel.' Such names, applied 
to places, occur elsewhere. See the last words in Ezekiel, 
and also Jer. xxxiii. 16, (ad fin.) which cannot be proved to 



CRAP.XKV.19— xxxv.29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 321 

relate to any other object than Jerusalem. It is as if the 
patriarch had said, ' I have experienced that God is the God 
of Israel, and this altar I erect as a memorial of his mercies. 
Gratitude compels the avowal.' The name of God is ap- 
plied to the object whereby or wherein he is honored. 
Still, there may be an ellipsis of altar ; or b& may be un- 
derstood in a genitive sense, and the meaning be: 'he called 
it God's,' the next words being explanatory. The Septua- 
gint, s«jrsxaXetfa<ro rov Ssov 'Itigaqk, 'he invoked the God of 
Israel,' and the Vulgate, invocavit super illud fortissimum 
Deum Israelis, do not accord with the Hebrew. The for- 
mer omits any notice of the words J^5 lb, and the latter 
gives to ib~^P/H the sense of 'invoking upon,' while its 
ordinary meaning is to name, as in Gen. i. 5, 7, and in many 
other places. 

(131.) The phrase, " to work folly in (or, against) Israel, 
b^fe?5," is thought by some to be of later origin than that 
period in which the book of Genesis is supposed to have 
been written. It occurs in Josh. vii. 15, Judg. xx. 10. But* 
although in these places Israel is used for the nation, the 
phrase may have originated from the very text before us. 
The language is not indicative of a later age than that of the 
patriarch himself. 

(132.) While the cruel and crafty plot of Jacob's sons 
deserves the severest reprobation, it is evident, and espe- 
cially from v. 23, that the Shechemites also acted with du- 
plicity and from interested motives. They were over- 
reached by the superior management of their enemies. 

(133.) The expression, " terror of God," in v. 5, is con- 
sidered by some as a Hebraism, for ' great terror,' as in 
xxiii. 6, ' a prince of God,' for " a mighty prince," and xxx. 
41 



322 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART Ix . 

8, 'wrestlings of God,' for "great wrestlings," and else- 
where. Inasmuch, however, as an extraordinary provi- 
dence often superintended and controlled the affairs of the 
patriarchs and their families, the view suggested in the Ana- 
lysis is preferable. Compare Exod. xxiii. 27: "I will send 
my fear before thee." 

(134.) Compare xxxiii. 20, which is probably parallel. 
Thus the meaning will be : 'he called the place, God of 
Bethel.' — Another view is admissible : ' he called the place 
of God,' (that is, the place consecrated to God,) 'Bethel'; or, 
' he called the place, God's, Bethel.' Thus the last words, 
meaning ' God's house,' will be explanatory. 

(135.) The space denoted by the original word «"Tli$ 
cannot be determined. From the etymology, it would seem 
to imply a considerable distance : but this must, of course, 
be relative. In 2 Kings v. 19, the distance which it denotes 
could not have been great. See Gesenius under the word, 
Schleusner's Thesaurus Veteris Testamenti, under ^a^ada 
and 'Irfrfo'^oixos. 

(136.) The name Benjamin, ^5^5? is thought by several 
commentators to mean, ' son of old age,' V'fa'J being taken 
as the Chaldee form, for ' days.' But the evident antithesis 
between Benoni, ' son of my sorrow,' and Benjamin, shows 
that the latter must denote excellence or happiness of some 
kind. The parallelism in Ps. lxxx. 18, (17,) suggests the 
idea of strength, and this is probably what the name im- 
plies, as the right hand is more vigorous and efficient than 
the left. 

(137.) As all Jacob's children, except Benjamin, were 



CHAP. xxv. 19— xxxv.29.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 323 

born in Mesopotamia, the historian does not think it neces- 
sary to mention this one in particular. His language is 
popular rather than exact. Thus in 1 Cor. xv. 5, it is said, 
that Christ appeared " to the twelve," although the suicide 
of Judas had reduced the number of the apostles to eleven ; 
and in Luke xxiv. 33, " the eleven" are said to have been 
" gathered together," although we are elsewhere informed 
that Thomas was not one of their number. See John xxi. 
24, where again the expression is, " one of the twelve." All 
this is popular language. The Scripture abounds with it, 
and the failure to recognize it has been a prolific source of 
mistakes and difficulties. 



Part X. Chap, xxxvi. 

(138.) On comparing xxvi. 34, with the second verse of 
this chapter, a seeming discrepancy appears. To solve it 
the conjecture has been advanced, that, the names designate 
different persons, thus : (1) Judith ; (2) Bashemath, the 
daughter of Elon ; (3) Adah, another daughter of Elon. 
The supposition of Le Clerc, that the latter of these names 
was applied by Isaac and Rebecca to Bashemath, in refer- 
ence to her character and conduct, this meaning being 

drawn from the Arabic ( J^, to transgress, act wickedly, 
is quite improbable. (4) Aholibamah, the daughter of Anah ; 
(5) Bashemath, the daughter of Ishmael ; and (6) Mahalath, 
her sister, (xxviii. 9.) According to this view, six wives of 
Esau will be mentioned. 

Another theory removes the difficulty, by supposing that 
each of these women appears under two names, thus re- 
ducing the number of his wives to three. Hengstenberg 
adopts this course. See his Authentic des Pentateuches, II. p. 
273 ss. He identifies the Anah of xxxvi. 2, 24, with Beeri 



324 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part x. 

of xxvi. 34, who derived his name *H?3, equivalent to 
* well' or ' spring finder,' from the discovery of warm 
springs mentioned in xxxvi. 24. This is now generally 
acknowledged by critics to be the most probable meaning of 
d 1 ???.? which is rendered in our translation, " mules." This 
man, who in xxxvi. 2, is called a Hivite, is named a Horite 
in v. 20 ; that is, he belonged to that subdivision of the 
Canaanitish race of the Hivites, who, from their residence 
in caves, were known as Horites or Troglodytes, from the 
Hebrew and Greek words respectively. In xxvi. 34, the 
same person, if Hengstenberg's theory is correct, is called a 
Hittite. This discrepancy he removes by showing that the 
term Hittite, although it originally designated a single 
Canaanitish tribe, was, like the name Amorite, employed in 
a broader sense, to denote the whole race. Thus in Josh, 
i. 4, " the land of the Hittites" comprehended all the country 
of the Canaanites ; in 1 Kings x. 29, we read of " all the 
kings of the Hittites ;" and in 2 Kings vii. 6, " the king of 
Israel" is said to have " hired the kings of the Hittites." With 
this view the language in Ezek. xvi. 3, corresponds : " thy 
father was an Amorite and thy mother a Hittite." So in 
Gen. xxvii. 46, xxviii. 1, the Hittite women are put for 
Canaanitish women in general. Hence it is clear, that the 
same individual might be a Hivite and a Hittite. He con- 
jectures that all the wives of Esau received new names at their 
marriage, when they left their families, by which names they 
are designated in xxxvi ; Judith (xxvi. 34,) is Aholibamah, 
Bashemath is Adah, and Mahalath (xxviii. 9,) is Bashemath, 
How closely new circumstances and new names are con- 
nected in the east, is well known ; and this is particularly 
true of females. See p. 277. 

If neither of those solutions should be thought altogether 
satisfactory, we cannot be surprised, much less charge the 



chap, xxxvi.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 325 

author with contradiction, if we consider the great antiquity 
of the matter, the absence of all other data than those con- 
tained in the Bible, the want of analogy with modern and 
occidental usages which marked the ancient state of things, 
and the want of importance as regards ourselves of the 
whole subject. 

(139.) The original is y^~b^. The phrase " into the 
country," which is used in the English translation, does not 
convey the meaning, and indeed, in the circumstances in 
which the two brothers then were, it is hardly explicable. 
It would in itself seem to imply, that before they had been 
together in some city, which is surely unfounded and im- 
probable. 

(140.) This portion contains more than one inscription. 
That in v. 1 is general, and intended for the whole chapter. 
In v. 5, we have a subscription, referring back to Esau's 
sons born in Canaan. The remainder of the chapter is in- 
troduced by v. 9 ; and the different clauses of it by their 
own appropriate inscriptions. All, however, is perfectly 
natural, and not a trace of a disjointed or fragmentary com- 
position is discoverable. 

(141.) It appears that v. 15 — 18 give the list of dukes 
(Q^lD 7 !^) through whom the Idumean nation originated from 
Esau, and who were themselves founders of as many lines ; 
while, on the other hand, v. 40 — 43 specify those who 
flourished in the time of Moses : so that we are here fur- 
nished with the condition of the Idumean people, as they 
were divided into tribes in the time of Moses, in the reign 
of the last named eighth king Hadar, or Hadad, as he is 



326 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part x. 

called in the first book of Chronicles. The early condition 
of Edom's national existence was one of division. This will 
be evident to any who attentively examine the list here given 
of its kings, which does not afford a single instance of re- 
gular succession from father to son. We may therefore 
infer without hesitation, that the political condition of the 
people was the very opposite of stability. And this is not 
at all surprising, as the immediately preceding period, during 
which the old inhabitants of the country were driven out or 
subjected, must have been one of violence. This view of 
the subject is derived in part from the expressions in v. 
40 — 43. The particular importance of the second list of 
dukes here exhibited, and its specific distinctions from the 
one before given, appear in the recurring adjuncts : " these 
are the dukes of Esau according to their families, according 
to their places, according to their names," v. 40 ; or, " accord- 
ing to their habitations in the land of their possession" 
v. 43. These adjuncts plainly denote, that, while the former 
list, 15 — 18, gives merely the genealogical and individual 
designation, this one has in view a geographical division of 
the race. This same view is confirmed by 1 Chron. i. 51. 
There it is said, "Hadad died also, and then (ffl^l) the dukes 
of Edom were, &c." Thus the Idumean dukes are repre- 
sented in the Chronicles and in Genesis in connexion with 
Hadad. The death of this king is mentioned in Chronicles, 
but not by Moses, as is that of the seven who preceded 
him. Now, if the period of Hadad's government coincides 
with that of Moses, (as is here supposed to be the case,) 
this peculiarity in the narrative is explained. And, on this 
theory, the fact that the wife of the eighth king is the only 
one mentioned by name, (Gen. xxxvi. 39,) is also susceptible 
of explanation. 

Further, it is clear from this chapter, that among the Idu- 



CHAP. XXXVI.] 



NOTES TO GENESIS. 



327 



means, kings and dukes were contemporaneous. This state- 
ment is in harmony with Ex. xv. 15, " the dukes of Edom 
shall be amazed," and Num. xx. 14, " Moses sent messen- 
gers unto the king of Edom." 

The connexion of this chapter with the preceding and 
subsequent ones, is worthy of notice. As the section xxv. 
12 — 18, which treats of Ishmael, the collateral branch, 
refers backwards to the history of Abraham, (xii. 1 — xxv. 
11,) which concludes with xxv. 1 — 11, and forwards to the 
history of Isaac, (xxv. 19 — xxxv. 29,) which begins with 
xxv. 19 ; so does the section, chapter xxxvi., relate to the 
preceding chapter, which contains a brief notice of Isaac, and 
also to the following, which keeps in view the story of Jacob. 
The identity of the author, and the fact of his being gov- 
erned by a regular plan, are manifestly deducible from such 
premises. And this will be still more evident, if we com- 
pare xxxv. 23 — 26 with xxv. 1 — 6, and xxxv. 27 — 29 with 
xxv. 7 — 9, and the manner in which xxv. 19 and xxxvii. 2 
begin. In order to assist the reader in making this com- 
parison, I shall exhibit the places respectively in parallel 
columns. 



xxxv. 23 — 26. " The sons of Leah; 
Reuben, Jacob's first-born, and Simeon, 
and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, 
and Zebulon. 

The sons of Rachel ; Joseph, and 
Benjamin. 

And the sons of Bilhah, Rachel's 
handmaid ; Dan and Naphthali. 

And the sons of Zilpah, Leah's 
handmaid; Gad and Asher. These 
are the sons of Jacob, &c," 



xxv. 1 — 6. " Then again Abraham 
took a wife, &c. 

And she bare him Zimran and 
Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and 
Ishbak, and Shuah. 

And Jokshan begat Sheba, and 
Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were, 
&c. 

And the sons of Midian, Ephah, 
and Epher, &c. All these were the 
children of Keturah. 

And Abraham gave all that he had 
unto Isaac. 

But unto the sons of the concubines, 
&c." 



328 



NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part x. 



xxxv. 27—29. " And Jacob came 
unto Isaac his father unto Mamre, 
unto the city of Arbah, which is He- 
bron, where Abraham and Isaac so- 
journed. 

And the days of Isaac were an 
hundred and fourscore years. 

And Isaac gave up the ghost, and 
died, and was gathered unto his peo- 
ple, being old and full of days ; and 
his sons Esau and Jacob buried him." 

(xxxvi. Generations of Esau.) 



xxxvii. 2. " These are the genera- 
tions of Jacob. Joseph, being seven- 
teen years old, &c." 



xxv. 7 — 9. " And these are the days 
of the years of Abraham's life which 
he lived, an hundred threescore and 
fifteen years. 

And Abraham gave up the ghost, 
and died in a good old age, an old 
man and full of years, and was 
gathered to his people. 

And his sons Isaac and Ishmael 
buried him in the cave, &c." 



(xxv. 12—18. 
mael.) 



Generations of Ish- 



xxv. 19, 20. " And these are the 
generations of Isaac, Abraham's son. 
Abraham begat Isaac. 

And Isaac was forty years old, &c." 



Now this is the arrangement, and ordinarily the method 
which pervades the whole book of Genesis, as the attentive 
reader will readily perceive. For the thirty-sixth chapter 
stands between the thirty-fifth and thirty-seventh, just as the 
notice of Cain, in chapter iv., stands between the account of 
Adam in ii., hi., and the introduction of Seth and his gene- 
alogy in chapter v. ; and further also, as chapter x. between 
the history of Noah in v. 32 — ix. 29, and the genealogy of 
Shem in xi. 10 ss. ; and lastly, as Ishmael is introduced be- 
tween Abraham and Isaac in xxv. 12 — 18. 

Another remark in connexion with this subject is worthy 
of notice. The way and manner in which the portion of 
the historical accounts of the patriarchs which immediately 
follows chapter xxxvi., (that is, xxxvii. 1, 2,) is introduced, 
manifestly refers back to that chapter. In other words, 
xxxvii. 1, " and Jacob dwelt in the land where his father 
was a stranger, in the land of Canaan," and xxxvi. 8, " thus 
dwelt Esau in Mount Sein," are analogous. That Jacob, 
the heir of the promise, remained in the land of promise, 



CHAP, xxxvi.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 329 

while Esau, the collateral branch of the family, was ex- 
cluded, is here, as every where else, the principal point. 
Both xxxvii. 2, therefore, and xxxvi. 9, are similarly con- 
nected with the verses immediately preceding them. 

The views given in this note are chiefly taken from the 
work of Drechsler before mentioned, p. 157 ss. Hengs- 
tenberg, II. p. 291 ss.. accords in general with this writer. 
I shall give the reader a very brief analysis of his re- 
marks. 

1 The chapter begins with an account of Esau's family 
during their residence in Canaan, and of their wealth and 
removal, 1 — 8. It proceeds to give a general view of the 
domestic condition of Esau in the country of Seir, 9 — 14, 
This is followed by the names of the tribes of the Edomites, 
who, like those of the Israelites, borrowed their names from 
those of Esau's nearest descendants, and each of whom had 
its head or duke, in Hebrew alluph, as the alluph of the tribe 
of Teman, &c. 15 — 19. Afterwards appears the genealogy 
of Seir the Horite, 20 — 30. Then we have the Edomitish 
kings, 31 — 39. And the chapter closes by giving the resi- 
dences of the chiefs of the Edomitish tribes, 40 — 43.' This 
general view removes the chief difficulties in the chapter. 
The fourteen alluphim who are named (15 — 19) before the 
kings, do not form a successive course, but are contempora- 
neous, and, after the kings, it is not a new course of phy- 
larchs that is given, but the residences of those before 
named. (He thinks it improbable that feminine nouns, such 
as Timnah, and Aholibamah, should denote the dukes them- 
selves ; and for this reason, and also an account of the 
adjuncts, " according to their families, after their places," 
conjectures that the names employed designate the settle- 
ments of the personages. But it is unreasonable to suppose 
that the same language, which in v. 15 — 19 designates indi- 
viduals, should in 40 — 43 be used of their local settlements.) 
42 



330 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART x . 

1 Every difficulty vanishes, when it is considered, that the 
royal power among the Edomites was not raised on the 
ruins of the authority of the phylarchs, (which would re- 
quire a considerable course of time for the continuance of 
the latter, after the expiration of which the course of eight 
kings might begin,) but that both existed contemporane- 
ously, the Edomites having rulers of tribes and also kings 
at the same time/ 

* The eighth king of the Edomites was evidently contem- 
poraneous with the author of the Pentateuch ; who mentions 
the decease of all the preceding kings, but is silent respect- 
ing his. The reason is plain : he was king when the author 
wrote. In the first book of Chronicles, indeed, his death is 
stated, ii. 51 ; but this work was composed long after his 
time. The author of Genesis, with a particularity which 
appears only in this individual case, mentions the names of 
his wife, her parent and grand-parent. What reason can fee 
assigned for this, unless the author was contemporary with 
the Edomitish king ? And the period of his reign falls 
within the age of Moses.' 

From what has been said, it appears that the dukes and 
kings of Edom mentioned in this chapter may have flourished 
before the death of Moses, and consequently the notice here 
contained may have been written by him. Inasmuch as he 
does speak of kings who should rule over the Hebrews, 
(see Deut. xvii. 14 — 20, xxviii. 36,) it is not impossible that 
he may have written even the latter clause of v. 31, — " be- 
fore there reigned any king over the children of Israel," 
particularly as in xxxv. 11, he recounts the promise of God 
to Jacob, that " kings" should descend from him. Still it 
may have been originally a marginal note, which in time 
found its way into the text. Several commentators have 
supposed that the last thirteen verses of the chapter cannot 
have been the work of the Hebrew lawgiver. The reader 



chap, xxxvi.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 331 

may find a notice of the most important writers on both 
sides of this question in Rosenmiiller's Scholia, p. 555 — 558. 
In v. 2, the phraseology, " Aholibamah the daughter of 
Anah, the daughter of Zibeon," is unusual and difficult. It 
is certain from v. 24, (compare also 1 Chron. i. 40,) that 
Anah was a male, and that he was Zibeon's son ; unless, in- 
deed, it be allowed that Zibeon had a son and daughter 
bearing the same name, which is very improbable. From 
v. 25 it appears that this Anah was Aholibamah's father. 
To remove the supposed difficulty, Dathe and Rosenmuiler 
would read 75 for £13, son for daughter, following the Sa- 
maritan text and the Septuagint and Syriac versions. But 
Michaelis, who was once of the same opinion, objects that 
the same mode of expression occurs in v. 14, 39 : to which 
may be added 1 Chron. i. 50. — Perhaps this method of re- 
counting was used among the Idumeans, and the meaning of 
the clause in v. 2 may be this : " Aholibamah the daughter 
of Anah, (and) the daughter," that is, grand-daughter, " of 
Zibeon." — In v. 25, the noun Anah is used for the pronoun 
his, as is usual in Hebrew. See the same idiom in xi. 29, 
" the father of Milcah" for ' her father.' 

Part XI. Chap, xxxvir. 1 — l. 

(142.) xxxvii. 2. " These are the generations," or rather, 
* this is an account of Jacob,' that is, of his family ; the 
patriarch, as head, standing for his whole household. The 
inscription marks the epoch of a new ancestral lord,* as in 
xxv. 19, ' this is an account of Isaac' In the one case, be- 
cause Isaac was the successor of Abraham, and in the other, 
because Jacob was the son and heir of Isaac ; the deaths of 
both having been previously mentioned, Abraham's in xxv. 

* Drechsler, p. 139. 



332 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part xi. 

10, and Isaac's in xxxv. 29. As the chapter immediately 
following, (xxxvi.) relates to Esau, so the portion which 
succeeds the notice of Abraham's death, (xxv. 12 — 18,) re- 
lates to Ishmael. The construction and arrangement of 
both accounts are decidedly in favor of the opinion that 
both originated with the same author, and unfavorable to the 
theory, that each biographical narrative is founded on an in- 
dependent document. 

As the inscription marks the accession of a new chief, in 
the patriarchal line, and follows the account of the death of 
a predecessor, we need not be surprised that the inscription 
in xxxvii. 2, purporting to be an account of Jacob, is im- 
mediately succeeded by a part of the history of Joseph. 

(143.) In v. 9, the article before the word " eleven" is not 
sanctioned by the Hebrew. If omitted, the meaning will 
be clearer. — As Joseph's own mother was dead, (compare 
xxxv. 18, and xxx. 22 — 24,) perhaps Bilhah may be meant, 
or Leah, if she still lived. But this supposition is by no 
means necessary, as the fact of Rachel's death heightens 
the absurdity of what seems to be implied in the dream. 

(144.) The Ishmaelites and Midianites were both des- 
cended from Abraham, but of different female parentage. 
See xxv. 2, 4, 12—18. In this part of the narrative they 
appear to be identified, owing probably to their intimate as- 
sociation with each other. See also Judg. vii. 12, viii. 22, 
24, 26, where the words seem to be used promiscuously. 
Rosenmiiller distinguishes them as genus and species, illus- 
trating by the comparison, taken from Aben Esra, of French- 
men and Lyonnese. As the Ishmaelites were the most nu- 
merous and powerful of Abraham's descendants; (with the 
exception of the Israelites,) all the others seem to have 
become merged in them, and to Have been known by their 



CHAP, xxxvii. 1 — l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 333 

name ; as, in the present day, the Arabians boast of being 
the posterity of Ishmael. 

(145.) Some weighty chronological difficulties arise from 
the account in this chapter. Certain of the events related 
in it must have taken place before the sale of Joseph. For, 
from this time until Jacob's descent into Egypt, not more 
than twenty-two years elapsed, (see xxxvii. 2, xli. 46, and 
to the thirteen years thus obtained, add the seven of plenty 
and two of famine which had passed by, xlv. 11,) which is 
too short a period for Judah to have three sons by the same 
mother, to marry them, and by his daughter-in-law to have 
twins, one of whom, Pharez, when he went to Egypt, had 
also two, xlvi. 12. On the other hand, if Judah' s incest with 
Tamar happened about the time of Joseph's sale, and the 
story be allowed to be properly placed here, this will carry 
up the circumstance of xxxviii. 1, 2, to the time when Ja- 
cob was in Mesopotamia. For, if we allow fourteen years 
(which is little enough, and in all probability too little,) for 
Shelah to be grown up, (xxxviii. 11, 14,) and three for the 
births of himself and two brothers, (v. 3 — 5,) this will make 
about seventeen between the conduct of Judah mentioned 
in v. 16 ss., and his associating with Shuah, (v. 2.) And as 
Joseph was seventeen when he was sold, (xxxvii. 2,) the 
affair of xxxviii. 1, 2, will be about contemporaneous with 
the birth of Joseph mentioned in xxx. 24 ; that is, fourteen 
years after Jacob had come to Mesopotamia, supposing his 
residence there to have been only twenty years. Compare 
xxx. 25 ss., and xxxi. 38. If now Jacob did not marry 
Rachel until he had served seven years, (xxix. 20, 21,) as 
not less than three and a half elapsed between his marriage 
and the birth of his fourth son Judah, (v. 31 — 35,) only the 
same space of time will remain between his birth and 
Joseph's ; in other words, between his birth and the affair 



334 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part xi. 

with Shuah mentioned in xxxviii. 1, 2, which cannot possi- 
bly be correct. If, according to the writers mentioned in 
note (112,) Jacob married soon after he went to Mesopo- 
tamia, Judah will still be no more than ten and a half years 
old at the time in view. This does not remove the difficulty, 
while it involves us in another of an exegetical kind. See 
the note just referred to. Dr. Kennicott, quoted by Dr. 
Adam Clarke, thinks that Jacob served and lived in connex- 
ion with Laban forty years, supposing the twenty years 
mentioned in xxxi. 38, and that in v. 41, to be two distinct 
periods.* Perhaps he spent more time in Mesopotamia, or 
elsewhere out of Canaan, than the brief history narrates, 
and twenty years of the whole period in Laban's service ; 
for the twenty years mentioned in both these texts do seem 
to be identical, notwithstanding the learned author's very 
plausible defence of the contrary view. Such a supposition 
will relieve us of the embarrassment occasioned by the 
chronological difficulties equally well with that maintained 
by Kennicott, while it allows us to give what appears 
to be the most natural exposition of the two verses just re- 
ferred to. 

There is still another view of this subject, which, if ad- 
missible, will effectually remove the difficulty already ex- 
amined. It supposes, that the design of the author of the 
book of Genesis was not to mention those of Jacob's family 
who were living at the time of the descent into Egypt, and 
then accompanied him and his sons thither, but rather to 
state the whole number of his family, in order to show how 
abundant was the harvest, which in a comparatively short 
time sprang up from such a handful of seed. Compare Ex. 
i. 5, 7, Deut. x. 22. Several of his grand-children, there- 

* See the remarks appended to Clarke's Commentary on chapter 
xxxi. 



CHAP. XXXVII. 1— l.J NOTES TO GENESIS. 335 

fore, may have been born some time after the settlement in 
Egypt ; and of course his great-grand-children Hezron and 
Hamul, mentioned in xlvi. 12. The sacred writer probably 
intended to state the number of Jacob's descendants who 
were living at the time of his death, and from whom the 
nation of the Israelites descended. It is remarkable, that, 
although in xlvi. 7, " his daughters and his sons' daughters" 
are spoken of as " brought with him" into Egypt, the only 
females mentioned in the subsequent catalogue are his 
daughter Dinah, and Serah the daughter of Asher. Can 
it be that all his other grand-daughters had died ? Or, is it 
not more probable that they had married Egyptians, or men 
of some neighboring nation, and consequently are not to be 
regarded in the light of " mothers in Israel" ? 

The following considerations in favor of the view above 
stated are alleged by Hengstenberg in his reply to the ob- 
jections of Ilgen, De Wette, Von Bohlen, and Liitzelberger. 
Authentic des Pentateuches, II. p. 354 — 359. 

1. At the time of the descent into Egypt, Reuben had only 
two sons, for if he had more, he undoubtedly would not have 
limited the offer made in xlii. 37, to that number. But in xlvi. 
9, four sons of Reuben are enumerated, two of whom must 
consequently have been born in Egypt. — But this argu- 
ment is not conclusive. Perhaps the original ^Ji ^ip - ^^ 
will bear to be rendered ' the two of my sons,' and thus the 
father will not specify the number of his male children, but 
offer to the distracted patriarch two lives for one. Besides, 
it is very easy to conjecture that only two sons of Reuben 
were present or at home on the occasion referred to. 

2. Benjamin is so constantly represented as a young man, 
that it could hardly have occurred to an Israelite, that at 
the time of his going to Egypt he was the father of ten 
sons. Compare Gen. xliii. 8, xliv. 30 — 33 ; also xliii. 29. 

3. The author seems to hint, with respect to Hezron and 



336 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part xi. 

Hamul (v. 12), that they were substitutes for Er and Onan, 
and that they were not born in Canaan. "And Er and 
Onan died in the land of Canaan, and the sons of Pharez 
were Hezron and Hamul." Venema gives the same view 
of this passage. — The argument seems to rest on the sup- 
position, that on this ground only can a satisfactory reason 
be given for introducing the phrase, "in the land of Canaan." 
But the connexion of this clause is rather with the words 
preceding than with those which follow it, and merely state 
the fact that the deaths of Er and Onan took place before 
the descent. 

4. Immediately before the genealogy, it is said in xlvi. 5 : 
" and the sons of Israel carried Jacob their father and their 
little ones, &c." ; and, according to xliii. 8, the family consisted 
of Jacob, his sons and their " little ones." But the genealogy 
presents us with grand-sons of Jacob, who themselves have 
children. It cannot, therefore, be the author's intention to 
keep himself to the very point of time when the children of 
Israel came to Egypt. 

5. In Num. xxvi., which contains a census of the Israel- 
ites, not a single grand-son of Jacob is mentioned, who has 
not been already recounted in Gen. xlvi.* This is scarcely 
explicable, if all who are mentioned in Genesis were living 
at the time of the descent into Egypt. It is quite unreasona- 
ble to suppose that no sons were born to Jacob's children 
after their settlement in that country ; although it is in the 
highest degree probable, that several of those who accom- 
panied their parents died without offspring. 

6. In xxxvii. 1, the author announces the "generations" 
or genealogy of Jacob. His sons had already been enu- 
merated in that of Isaac. It remained to mention his 

* The reader will of course bear in mind, that proper allowances 
must be made for slight changes and transpositions of letters. 



CHAP, xxxvn. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 337 

grand-sons, and perhaps some of his more distinguished 
great-grand-sons. In giving this genealogy, it would 
indeed be of little consequence to inform us where the 
grand-children were born, but highly important, indeed, not 
to omit any in the enumeration. Otherwise it were rea- 
sonable to expect a second genealogical view, relative to 
the increase of the patriarchal family in Egypt. But such 
statistical information is not to be found. 

From what has been said, it is evident that it cannot have 
been the design of the author merely to mention those per- 
sons who were already born at the time of the descent into 
Egypt. " The list comprehends all the males of Jacob's 
family, whether born in Mesopotamia or in Canaan or in 
Egypt." Hartmann. 

But the result thus attained appears to be in direct oppo- 
sition to the express declaration of the sacred author him- 
self. He tells us in xlvi. 26, that " all the souls that came 
with Jacob into Egypt, which came out of his loins, besides 
Jacob's sons' wives, all the souls were three score and six." 
This difficulty is increased by the next verse, which speci- 
fies Joseph and his sons as already in Egypt, seemingly in 
contradistinction to those who came there in company with 
Jacob. 

In reply to this very plausible objection, it may be said, 
that the author considers those who were born in Egypt as 
having come there with Jacob in their fathers. This posi- 
tion is maintained on the following grounds : 

1. It is said in v. 27 : "all the souls of the house of Ja- 
cob which came into Egypt were three score and ten." As 
in this enumeration the sons of Joseph are comprehended in 
the general number of those who came to Egypt, although 
they were born in that country, and consequently had come 
there in the person of their father; so also may other grand- 
sons of Jacob be enumerated as a part of the aggregate 
43 



338 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

who are said to have come with him to Egypt, although they 
came thither in their fathers respectively. This conclusion 
is irresistible. 

2. The phraseology in v. 15 is worthy of notice. "These 
(the whole number named in the preceding verses,) are the 
sons of Leah, which she bore unto Jacob in Padan Aram, 
with his daughter Dinah ; all the souls of his sons and his 
daughters were thirty and three" Here, and in v. 8, the word 
" sons" may be taken in a limited or more extended mean- 
ing. In either case the sons appear as appertaining to the 
fathers, and born along with them. The same remark ap- 
plies to v. 18 : "these are the sons of Zilpah, whom Laban 
gave to Leah his daughter, and these she bare unto Jacob, 
sixteen souls." Compare also v. 25, which is similar. 

3. In Deut. x. 22, it is said : " thy fathers went down into 
Egypt in (not with) three score and ten persons," compre- 
hending Joseph's sons as having gone down in their father. 
Compare the language " I will surely bring thee up again" 
in xlvi. 4, which refers to Jacob's posterity. 

Some of these considerations must be allowed to have 
great weight, and perhaps the theory which they are in- 
tended to maintain most satisfactorily removes the chrono- 
logical difficulty before stated. These various solutions are 
submitted to the judgment of the reader. 

(146.) It appears from the eighth verse, that the law in 
Deut. xxv. 5 ss., obliging a man to marry his brother's 
childless widow, with the view of raising a family for his 
brother, did not originate with Moses, but was in use in the 
patriarchal age. Indeed, this remark applies to some other 
particulars of the Mosaic system. An Essay on this sub- 
ject by Reimar, published in the Commentationes Theolo- 
gies, has been referred to in note (42.) 



CHAP, xxxvii. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 339 

(147.) The middle clause of the sixth verse may mean, 
that, having abandoned all his domestic affairs to Joseph, 
Potiphar was solicitous about nothing but to get his food in 
proper season: Or, as the food of the Egyptians, or the 
manner of preparing and using it, differed in some respects 
from that of the Hebrews, (compare xliii. 32,) that Joseph 
was not allowed to have any concern with his master's 
table. 

(148.) It has been supposed, that a comparison of Gen. 
xxxvii., xxxix. and xl., exhibits a difficulty which cannot be 
removed. In xxxvii. 36, and xxxix. 1, Potiphar is called 
" the captain of the guard," meaning of the king's body 
guard. Joseph is sold to this person, calumniated by his 
wife, and consequently imprisoned by him. He becomes a 
favorite with the keeper of the prison, who commits to him 
the important trust of the other'prisoners, xxxix. 21 — 23. But 
in xl. 4, " the captain of the guard" is said to charge Joseph 
with the care of the chief butler and the chief baker. The 
question has been raised, had Pharaoh two captains of his 
body guard ? and is one of them identical with the keeper 
of the prison? The answer is easy. The captain of the 
body guard was commander, in modern phrase, lieutenant, 
of the prison, as is very plain from xl. 3 ; and probably the 
house in which Joseph was confined was an appendage to 
his residence. Thus, in the time of Jeremiah, ''the house of 
Jonathan the scribe" was employed as a prison. Jer. xxxvii. 
15. Still, the state prison of which Potiphar was the com- 
mander, had a special inspector, subject to the higher au- 
thority of the commander, and this is the person who is 
called the " keeper of the prison" If now Joseph made 
himself agreeable and necessary to this officer, who is never 
called his master, it would be very natural that he should 
make the useful Hebrew sub-inspector of the prison. Both 



340 NOTES TO GENESIS. [PART^l. 

before and after the confinement of the chief butler and chief 
baker, he continues under the higher authority, the captain 
of the guard, and is still his servant, xli. 12. That Potiphar 
should entrust these two officers to the care of Joseph 
involves no difficulty ; for doubtless the keeper of the prison 
had informed him of Joseph's fidelity ; and very probably 
he distrusted the correctness of his wife's report. This is 
quite reconcileable with the opinion, that prudential con- 
siderations prevented him from avowing his servant's inno- 
cence by releasing him from prison. 

(149.) The expression in the fifth verse, " each man ac- 
cording to the interpretation of his dream," intimates, that 
the dream of each had a different exposition. Dathe gives 
the meaning : " diversas sentential somnia." The noun is 
used for the pronoun : ' each one's dream had its own pe- 
culiar interpretation.' 

(150.) Inv. 13, the words ^PfcVJ"]^ &fcl are rendered 
in our translation, " shall lift up thy head." The same phrase 
is employed in Exod. xxx. 12, and Num. i. 49, in the sense 
of numbering, and this sense agrees well with the use of the 
phrase in v. 20 : " he lifted up the head of the chief butler 
and of the chief baker in the midst of his servants." It 
might then be translated literally, * shall take thy poll ;' that 
is, in recounting his officers, Pharaoh shall number thee, and. 
as it follows, shall restore thee to thy station. The addition of 
Vb^fc to the same phrase in v. 19, gives a different mean- 
ing : ' shall raise thy head from thee, 1 that is, shall put thee 
to death. Whether this were done by decapitation, or by 
some other mode of execution, the phrase itself does not 
determine. In the case before us, suspension, in some form 
or other, was the mode adopted. See v. 22. 



CHAP. XXXVII 



1—L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 341 



Gesenius, in his Lexicon, under &&!} I- ( D ) (/)» considers 
the phrase, ' to lift up the head,' in this chapter, as elliptical, 
for the full expression ' to lift up the head out of prison ;' 
such places of confinement being usually under ground. 
He refers to 2 Kings xxv. 27, where the words occur in re- 
ference to the king of Babylon and his captive, the king of 
Judah, whom he released from a long imprisonment. Here 
the idea of taking the poll would seem to be inadmissible. 
It is most probable, therefore, that the language in 2 Kings 
denotes removal from prison, and restoration to liberty. 
And Gesenius may have seized upon the fundamental thought 
implied in the phrase, namely, 'to remove from prison,' the 
result of such removal, whether happy or distressful, being 
expressed by the subsequent language. 

" The land of the Hebrews" in v. 15, has been supposed 
to be an interpolation, but without sufficient reason. The 
country about Hebron may have been so designated even in 
Joseph's time ; and the term " Hebrews" applied to all who 
were connected with Jacob's family. Abraham, the He- 
brew, had visited Egypt, and probably left there a distinct 
impression of his patronymic name as well as of his character, 
and it would doubtless be continued by means of caravans and 
trading companies. The appellation appears to have been 
current, and to have needed no interpretation. See xxxix. 
14, 17, xli. 12. The Hebrews were probably regarded by 
the Egyptians as settlers in Canaan, part of which would be 
called by their name, as other parts were known as the 
lands of Jebusites, Perizzites, Hittites, &c. 

(151.) Some have supposed the word tp.58! in v. 43, to 
be Hebrew, and derived it from tplZl with the preformative 
& for H, meaning " bow the knee." But most probably it 
is Egyptian. Various significations have been assigned to 



342 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

it, according to the supposed origin and composition of the 
word. Foster compares it with haprechek, meaning ' clothed 
by the king,' and thinks it refers to the vesture and orna- 
ments just mentioned, and that Joseph's favor with the mon- 
arch was to be announced to the people by a public exhibi- 
tion and proclamation, as in the case of Mordecai. See 
Esther vi. 11. — The signification most generally received, 
however, is that of La Croze. He derives the word from 
oube rech, meaning, * bend down,' ' do reverence before.' 
Thus the same idea is supported both by the Egyptian and 
Hebrew usage. See Jablonskii Opuscula, (edit. Te Water,) 
Tom. I. p. 4—8. 

(152.) tlWB 1H553- The former of these words is de- 
rived by some from *I&^ to hide. The Hebrew affords no 
analogy that can be relied on with the latter. Yet the 
meaning of both has been supposed to be, ' revealer of 
secrets ;' and this is given by several ancient Jewish au- 
thorities. — The terms are no doubt Egyptian, with which 
the Septuagint -^ovSro^fpav^ nearly corresponds, and signify, 
* saviour of the age' or 'world.' Dr. L. Loewe, in a Disser- 
tation on "the Origin of the Egyptian Language, proved by 
the Analysis of that and the Hebrew," gives " a very dif- 
ferent meaning," which he " fearlessly asserts it had in 
the mind of Pharaoh," namely, " Son of the God of life." 
But this result is founded on so many assumptions and fan- 
ciful analogies, that it is not likely to be admitted by judi- 
cious commentators. Jablonski, who coincides in the mean- 
ing above given, has examined the subject at length, ubi 
sup. p. 207 — 216. Those who have not access to this 
learned writer, may consult Rosenmiiller's notes, and Gese- 
nius on the word. 

(153.) In the several notices which occur in the narrative 



CHAP, xxxvii. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 343 

respecting the bundles of money found in the sacks, there 
appears to be a palpable discrepancy. In the first account 
of this circumstance, (xlii. 27,) on of the brothers is said to 
have discovered his money on opening " his sack to give 
his ass provender at the inn ;" and afterwards, (v. 35,) on 
their return home it was found that " every man's bundle of 
money" had been secured to him in the same manner. 
Hence it would seem evident, that this discovery was not 
made until they arrived at their father's house. Whereas, 
from what is subsequently stated by the brothers to Joseph's 
steward, (xliii. 21,) it appears no less evident, that it was 
made at the inn, where, as it was before said, one of them 
found his money in his sack's mouth. — It is possible, that 
the agitation of mind under which the communication was 
made to the steward, (see particularly v. 18,) may have led 
the speaker into a slight mistake, inducing him to say, that 
that took place at the inn which happened partly there and 
partly at home. Or it may be, that several opened their 
sacks at the inn, although one only is said to have done so 
in xlii. 27, and thus what occurred to several in that place, 
and to the rest of them at home, is represented to the stew- 
ard in general terms as happening at the inn, the mere cir- 
cumstance of place being regarded as indifferent. To sup- 
pose a contradiction of this kind in the author, would be 
irreconcilable with his character as an intelligent and care- 
ful historian, (which the whole tenor of his book proves,) 
independently of his inspiration. 

(154.) In v. 32, it is said: to "eat with the Hebrews is 
an abomination unto the Egyptians." Herodotus tells us, 
that the Egyptians would not associate much with the 
Greeks, nor use any of their culinary utensils. See II. 41 ; 
in Beloe's Translation, Vol. I. p. 328, Philadelphia edition, 
1814. It is not likely that the Greeks were exclusively the 



344 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part xi. 

objects of their aversion ; most probably it extended to 
foreigners in general. Thus it affords one reason for the 
statement of abhorrence so strongly represented in the text. 
Besides, the cattle that were slaughtered and eaten by the 
Hebrews, were, in some of the nomes of Egypt, regarded 
as objects of worship. — It is also afterwards said, that "every 
shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians." xlvi. 34. 
It is evident that this cannot be understood of shepherds 
universally, for the king had his own flocks and shepherds, 
as is plain from xlvii. 6. Compare also Exod. ix. 3, 4, 6, 
19 — 21. These texts prove that the occupation was not 
unusual among the Egyptians. (See also Wilkinson's Man- 
ners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, Vol. I. p. 239, 
chap. iii. and II. p. 15, chap, iv., where the Egyptian "pas- 
tors" are mentioned as belonging to the fourth caste, and are 
" subdivided into oxherds, shepherds, goatherds, and swine- 
herds.") It has been said, that they kept flocks simply for 
the milk, skin, and wool, and abstained entirely from the use 
of them for food. Grotius, on xlvi. 34, gives as a reason 
for the declaration there made, "that the shepherds deprived 
the cattle of life and used the flesh for food ;" and says that 
" the Egyptians kept flocks for the sake of the wool and 
milk." Quia pastores pecori vitam adimebant, et carne 
vescebantur. — Pecora iEgyptii habebant, sed lanse et lactis 
causa." Aben Ezra also tells us that " the Egyptians did 
not then eat flesh," ^i&iSi t^^fi T»ft &b dttfi fiW5 
ItDi, and he compares them with the natives of India, who 
abstain, he says, both from flesh and milk. But that the 
Egyptians did avoid the use of flesh is not susceptible of 
proof, as Bryant has abundantly shown in his Analysis of 
Ancient Mythology ; although some of his quotations from 
Herodotus are of doubtful application. See Vol. VI. p. 
168 — 176, 8vo. London, 1807. In some nomes they used 
as articles of food what were objects of worship in others. 



CHAP. XXXVII, 



1_ L .] NOTES TO GENESIS. 345 



See Heeren's Ideen tiber die Politik, &c. translated into 
English, and published under the title of " Historical Re- 
searches into the Politics, Intercourse, and Trade of the 
Carthaginians, Ethiopians, and Egyptians, Vol. II. p. 183, 
Oxford edition. That the ancient Egyptians used flesh very 
freely, particularly beef and goose, appears from the sculp- 
tures which still remain. See Wilkinson, Vol. II. p. 367 ss., 
chap. vii. It is also plainly alluded to in Ex. xvi. 3, where 
the murmuring Hebrews long for " the flesh-pots" at which 
they were in the habit of enjoying themselves when in 
Egypt. Still, the indiscriminate use of the flesh of cattle for 
food by the Hebrews and foreign shepherds, may afford 
another reason why both were regarded by the Egyptians 
with abhorrence. 

A further reason has been assigned why shepherds, and 
consequently Hebrews, who, in common with their ances- 
tors, led a pastoral life, Were held in detestation by the 
Egyptians. It is said that they had suffered much and long 
from the invasion of the shepherd race, who had usurped 
the government and exercised a foreign sway over the na- 
tion, so that the very name and occupation were abomina- 
ble to them. Shuckford, indeed, in his Sacred and Pro- 
fane History Connected, Book VII. Vol. II. p, 205—210, 
places the invasion of these foreigners considerably after this 
period, and supposes the king who arose after Joseph's 
death, and disregarded the services which he had rendered 
the nation, to have been the first of this new dynasty. But 
this hypothesis, like some others of the same author, is un- 
founded. The best supported theories, and those which are' 
most generally received, allow a much earlier date to this 
invasion. Hales, in his new Analysis of Chronology, Vol. 
II. p. 157, places it six years before the birth of Abraham ; 
Usher, eighty-eight. See his Chronologia Sacra, anno 
mundi 1920 and 2008. Bryant also assigns to it a period 
44 



146 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

anterior to the time of that patriarch, Vol. VI. p. 153. He 
enters largely into the history of this shepherd race, ex- 
hibits all that is said of them by Manetho, Josephus, and 
others ; distinguishes them from the Hebrews, whose settle- 
ment he thinks was subsequent to their expulsion ; and de- 
tails many interesting particulars, mingled, however, with 
not a little that is fanciful and groundless. See Vol. IV. p. 
301 ss., and VI. p. 1 — 187. Wilkinson is also of opinion, 
that " the hatred borne against shepherds by the Egyptians 
was not owing solely to their contempt for that occupation. 
This feeling," says he, " originated in another and a far 
more powerful cause, — the previous occupation of their 
country by a pastor race, who had committed great cruelties 
during their possession of the country ; and the already ex- 
isting prejudice against shepherds when the Hebrews ar- 
rived, plainly shows their invasion to have happened pre- 
vious to that event." Vol. II. p. 16, €hap. iv. If, now, these 
shepherd invaders had been driven out from Egypt a short 
time before the age of Joseph, no wonder that shepherds 
should have been detested by the natives. This supposition 
is in harmony with the incidents mentioned in the narrative ; 
it adds point to the affected suspicion of Joseph, that his 
brothers were spies, and shows that Pharaoh's allowing them 
to occupy the land of Goshen was politic, as the Hebrews, 
placed on the Arabian frontier, became a sort of barrier, to 
prevent the invasion of any foreign aggressors from the 
east. 

Many writers, however, identify the shepherds with the 
Israelites, considering the narrative of Manetho, from whom 
chiefly the account of this race is drawn, as too confused 
and uncertain to be relied on with confidence. See Buddaeus, 
Hist. Ecc. V. T. Period. I. sect. hi. § 24, Tom. I. p. 451 ss. ; 
Witsius, iEgyptiaca, Lib. III. p. 208 — 216; Vitringa in Isa. 
cap. xix. Notitia iEgypti, xxxi. xxxii. Tom. I. p. 549, 550 ; 



CHAP, xxxvu. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 347 

and Perizonius, iEgyptiarum Originum et Temporum Anti- 
quissimorum Investigatio, cap. xix. p. 32S — 352. 

The learned, acute, and careful German author, Heeren, 
considers the whole account of the shepherd race, the hyksos 
of Manetho, as referring to the repeated invasions and at- 
tacks to which lower Egypt was subjected from the east, 
and particularly by Arabians, in proportion as it became 
more cultivated and settled by immigration from the south, 
and comprehending the settlement of these foreigners, who 
were finally expelled by the combined efforts of several 
contemporaneous Egyptian kings. Historical Researches, 
&c. Vol. II. chap. ii. p. 115 ss. He acquiesces in the view 
of Manetho, who " places the elevation of Joseph within 
this period," remarking that " the favorable reception of his 
family, leading a shepherd life, will be certainly most ex- 
plicable during the sway of a shepherd dynasty." p. 117. 
See also p. 119. On the Egyptian aversion to shepherds he 
makes the following remarks : " The extensive table lands 
which the nomad herdsman inhabited, were seldom [entirely] 
subject to the Pharaohs, probably never ; and the dominion 
over nomad hordes, from their very nature, must at all times 
be very uncertain and variable. From their whole manner 
of life, they can scarcely be considered otherwise than as 
natural enemies, which must be borne with, because they 
cannot be got rid of. To this, therefore, we may attribute 
the hate and scorn in which they were at all times held, and 
which the ruling priest caste carefully strove to nourish. 
" The neatherds are to the Egyptians an abomination," was 
said in the Mosaic period, and traces of the contempt with 
which they were regarded are found in Herodotus, ii. 128. 
There is no proof, however, that this disgrace attached to 
those cultivators, who, being proprietors of land, made the 
tending and breeding of cattle their business. Black cattle 
were by no means unclean in Egypt ; the cow was sacred 



348 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ P1RT XI . 

to Isis, and oxen generally served for food and sacrifice ; it 
is not therefore likely that the management of them should 
have caused defilement. It was not so much the keeping of 
cattle, which, in fact, was equally indispensable with agri^ 
culture, as the nomad life, which was directly opposed to 
the views and policy of the ruling caste. 

Besides, to this caste [of shepherds] seem to have be^ 
longed the tribes which had taken up their abode in the 
marshy plains of the Delta. According to Strabo, (p. 1142,) 
these were especially assigned by the ancient Pharaohs for 
the abode of the neatherds. The tribes which dwelt there 
had, nevertheless, as we are told by Herodotus, (ii. 92,) 
adopted Egyptian manners ; but they still remained half 
barbarians, and even robbers, for the thickets of reeds not 
only supplied them with the materials for their huts, but 
likewise protected them from the approach of strangers. 
Diod. i. 52. Heliodorus draws a similar picture of them. 
,/Ethiop. i. 5." p. 148, 149. 

The theory favored by Heeren is maintained also by Dr. 
J ? M. Jost, in his general history of the Israelites, Allge- 
meine Geschichte des Israelitischen Volks, Berlin, 1832. In 
Vol. I. p. 67, 74, he advances it incidentally, but afterwards, 
p, 94—97, he defends it at length. As his argument com- 
prehends probably all that can be urged with any weight in 
favor of this view, it may be well to give the reader an 
abstract of it. 

Jost places the exode about the middle or latter half of 
the fifteenth century before the Christian era, in the time of 
the fifth Ramesses. The fourth of this name, Ramesses 
Meiamum, died in the year A. C. 1493, after a reign of 
sixty-six years. About one hundred and fifty or two hun- 
dred years before, the dynasty of these kings had put an 
end to the authority of the shepherds, which had lasted two 
hundred and sixty years. Coming immediately after that of 



chap, xxxvu. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 349 

the shepherds, it must have been unfriendly to the Israelites, 
to whom that race was favorable, as it was altogether na- 
tural to expect that they would be. The shepherds were 
Shemites, descendants probably of Eber, and allied to the 
Israelites in spirit, language, and occupation ; which very 
circumstances would make them hateful to the Egyptians. 
This agrees with the apprehension of Pharaoh, that the 
Hebrews, who had become exceedingly numerous, might 
avail themselves of the occasion of a war to leave the 
country and increase the number of hostile neighbors. Ex, 
i. 10. Hence it is plain that the Israelites were able at that 
time to draw together a considerable army to act against 
the ruling dynasty. It follows, therefore, that several gene- 
rations, certainly more than two hundred years, must have 
passed away since Jacob and his family settled in Egypt.* 
Hence it appears also, as the shepherd dynasty lasted only 
two hundred and sixty years, that their settlement must have 
taken place not long after the commencement of that 
dynasty. 

This conclusion is corroborated by the simple narrative 
of Joseph, which presumes the reader to be acquainted 
with Egyptian history. In the first place the term Hebrews 
is applied, without immediate reference to Israel, whose 
family was small, to the whole body of the shepherd people,f 
who as such were hated by the Egyptians. This agrees 
with the opinion that they had conquered the country, and 
that the ruling monarchs were selected from their number 
and forced upon the people, by whom they were held in 
detestation, although they did accommodate themselves to 
the Egyptian laws and usages. 

* Jost adheres to the chronology which is supported by the Hebrew 
text, and maintains that the Israelites resided in Egypt four hundred 
and thirty years. See Exod. xii. 40. 

f Gen. xxxix. 14, xl. 15, xli. 12, xliii. 31, Ex. i. 16, iii. 18, and viii, 



350 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

Secondly, it was only under such a foreigner, and in such 
circumstances, that Joseph could have been raised to dis- 
tinction. Hence the cup-bearer mentioned him as a Hebrew 
youth, able to interpret dreams ; and hence the king, of the 
same stock originally, determined to send for him, as the 
Egyptian wise men gave him no satisfaction. The advice 
of Joseph was gladly taken, because the king perceived im- 
mediately that the establishment and independence of his 
people would be promoted by it. To have a Hebrew in his 
service as administrator of the kingdom would be agreeable 
to his dependents ; and his foes, the priests, were soothed by 
freeing them from civil burthens, and securing their incomes. 
And, although he conferred the right of citizenship on Joseph, 
giving him an Egyptian name and marrying him to the 
daughter of the priest of the sun, yet he did not venture to 
violate the feelings of the people, and Joseph did not sit at 
the same table with the Egyptian lords, because they would 
not eat with the shepherd race. Gen. xliii. 21. 

Thirdly, when Joseph's brothers came to Egypt, they un- 
doubtedly recognized him as the Hebrew, for his story must 
have been generally known ; but it never occurred to them 
that he was their brother, whom they had sold, as there 
were certainly many Hebrews in the land, and some of them 
men of distinction. He confirmed their error by employ- 
ing an interpreter. And it is only on the supposition here 
maintained, that he could affect to regard his ten brothers 
as spies ; for, while the shepherd race held the power, it is 
very conceivable that their jealousy might be excited by the 
apprehension of further inroads by others of the same stock. 
Such a feigned charge preferred by a governor acting under 
the authority of the genuine Egyptian family, would be 
altogether inexplicable. 

Lastly, Pharaoh was pleased with the account of Joseph's 
family. Did he know that they were shepherds ? And were 



CHAP, xxxvu. 1— L.] N0TE8 TO GENESIS. 351 

he an Egyptian, would he have allowed such men, hateful 
to his people, to settle in Egypt ? But if he were himself 
of the same stock, his own satisfaction and that of his cour- 
tiers is what might be expected from the characteristic hos- 
pitality of the race. Thus the Israelites were connected 
with the government, but hated by the Egyptian people. 
The remains of Jacob are embalmed, and, agreeably to his 
last will, committed to his own sepulchre, accompanied by 
many Egyptian lords, solemnities which it is not to be sup- 
posed that the enemies of the shepherd race would have 
allowed. The place in Canaan where the mourning cere- 
monies of the funeral were performed, was called by the in- 
habitants, Abel Misraim, (mourning of the Egyptians,) be- 
cause they were all conducted according to the Egyptian 
manner. 

There is certainly weight in some of the suggestions here 
advanced. And yet they are not of sufficient force to re- 
move all doubt from an inquirer's mind. The first argument 
assumes the general application of the term Hebrews to the 
whole body of the shepherd people. The truth of this can- 
not perhaps be denied, but the evidence of it is plainly un- 
satisfactory. The last of the author's references is probably 
a typographical error, as it has no bearing on the point. 
The others, although they harmonize with his view, are 
evidently inadequate to prove it. Indeed there is only one, 
(Gen. xliii. 31,) which, as proof, carries with it even plausi- 
bility. Still, the term Hebrew may have been applied to 
other races descended from the patriarch Eber, beside that 
of Jacob. 

The second argument seems also to be inconclusive. 
Undoubtedly " Joseph could have been raised to distinction 
under such a foreigner and in such circumstances ;" but 
wherein lies the impossibility or even the great difficulty 
of his elevation under a native monarch ? The cup-bearer 



352 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part xi. 

mentions Joseph to Pharaoh, not particularly as a Hebrew 
youth, but as a companion in trouble, whom prosperity had 
led him to forget, and of whom he is reminded by the 
monarch's very remarkable dream. The king would na- 
turally send for him, whether he were of the same stock 
with himself or not, for the plain reason that the Egyptian 
wise men were unable to satisfy his mind. On the same 
principle, the Babylonian monarch, in similar circumstances, 
sent for Daniel. Dan. v. J 3 — 16. — -Politic considerations 
may indeed have led Pharaoh to adopt the counsel of Joseph, 
but a moderate degree of good sense would of itself induce 
him to follow it. The high estimate in which the priests 
were held sufficiently accounts for ' the benefit of clergy' 
with which Pharaoh thought proper to favor them. And 
that Joseph and the Egyptian lords dined at separate tables, 
is at least as explicable on the theory that the ruling dynasty 
was Egyptian, as on that of Jost and Heeren. Indeed, on 
this theory, the supposition that the hostile feelings of the 
natives, whether of the common class or of the grandees,* 
towards the shepherds, showed themselves as is represented 
in the history, seems to involve a difficulty. It appears un- 
natural to understand the term " Egyptian," in the thirty- 
fourth verse of the forty-sixth chapter, of the subjugated 
natives. So bold an expression of contempt and detestation 
is not likely to have been generally made by the people 
at the very time that they were forced to submit to the 
hated rulers. Still, it cannot be denied, that such a state of 
things as this would imply might temporarily exist, as was 
the case in England in a considerable degree during some 
time after the Norman conquest. The brevity of the nar- 
rative, and the want of other clear historical data, seem 
to preclude the possibility of arriving at thorough satisfac- 
tion on such a topic. 

The third argument of Jost is based on the supposition 



CHAP, xxxvii. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS, 353 

which he assumes in the first, which would indeed account 
for the fact that Joseph's brethren did not recognize him, 
but is by no means necessary for this purpose. And surely 
Joseph might affect to regard them as spies, if the shepherd 
dynasty had been conquered and expelled not long before 
their arrival. — And, in reference to the last argument, it is 
evident, that the kindness with which Joseph was himself 
regarded by Pharaoh, and the gratitude of the monarch for 
his favorite's services both to himself and the nation, are 
sufficient to account for the friendly reception of his father 
and family; although the author's theory is quite in harmony 
with the circumstances of the narrative. It agrees also 
with the remark in Ex. i. 8, that " a new king arose, who 
did not regard Joseph." For, if the re-establishment of the 
rightful Egyptian dynasty on the expulsion of the shepherds 
is here meant, Joseph's memory would of course be disre- 
garded, and the Israelitish population despised. 

(155.) xliv. 5. The phrase 12) HIT tin 5 in this verse, in all 
probability, is equivalent to the same phrase in v. 15. Most 
of the ancient versions, including the Septuagint and Vulgate, 
give it the meaning of augur, divine ; and this is adopted 
by our English translation, although in the margin it follows 
the Chaldee Targum, and renders it, search. The former 
meaning is undoubtedly the usual sense of the word. In 
addition to these two places, it occurs elsewhere in the 
Bible, in Gen. xxx. 27, Lev. xix. 26, Num. xxiii. 23, xxiv. 1, 
Deut. xviii. 10, 1 Kings xx. 33, 2 Kings xvii. 17, xxi. 6, and 
2 Chron. xxxiii. 6. In some of these places it is connected 
with other words expressive of magical superstition, and 
always conveys this idea, or that of foreboding or taking as 
an omen, unless Gen. xxx. 27, and the texts under considera- 
tion, be regarded as exceptions. If the idea of divining be 
intended, it will not follow that the cup is represented as the 
45 



354 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

medium by which the divination was practised. That can- 
not be Joseph's meaning in v. 15, for the cup had not been 
in his possession, and to recover it would have been the very 
intention of the supposed divination. Neither is it the ne- 
cessary meaning of the clause in the fifth verse, which may 
be rendered, after several of the Jewish interpreters, ' on 
account of which he would divine ;' that is, he would re- 
sort to divination in order to ascertain what had become 
of it. See Munster, De Muis, and Cartwright in the Critici 
Sacri. 

The practice of divining by means of a cup is mentioned 
by Rosenmiiller in his Alte und neue Morgenland, I. p. 210 ss. 
He refers to Jamblicus on the Mysteries of the Egyptians, 
Lib. III. sect. 14, who says, that by means of certain figures 
reflected by the rays of light in clear water, future circum- 
stances were prognosticated ; and to Augustin, who, in his 
treatise, de Civitate Dei, Lib. VII. cap. 35, quotes a place 
of a lost work of Varro, wherein it is said that this sort of 
divination originated with the Persians. 

The manner of divination is stated to be as follows. Small 
pieces of gold or silver leaf or thin plate were thrown into 
a cup, intermingled with precious stones, on which certain 
characters were engraven. Then the inquirer repeated 
some forms of adjuration, and invoked the devil. The an- 
swer was communicated in various ways : sometimes by an 
intelligible voice ; sometimes by the same signs appearing 
on the surface of the water as had been engraven on the 
precious stones ; sometimes by exhibiting the image of the 
person respecting whom the applicant would inquire. 
Cornelius Agrippa, de Occulta Philosophia, Lib. I. cap. 57, 
mentions also, that many were accustomed to throw melted 
wax into a vessel of water, and from the forms which it as- 
sumed, to infer the answers to the proposed inquiries. 

In addition to the writers above mentioned, Rosenmiiller 



CHAP. XXXVII. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 355 

refers to Norden's Travels in Egypt and Nubia, D'Herbe- 
lot's Bibliotheque Orientale under Giam and Giemschid, and 
Von Hammer's Collection of Poems. 

Of the fact that such a superstitious usage existed, there 
can be no doubt ; whether it prevailed as anciently as the 
time of Joseph, is uncertain. However, if divination of any 
kind is alluded to in the places before us, this will not prove 
that Joseph practised it. Both he and the steward may ac- 
commodate their language to the ignorance of the brothers. 
And in neither of the verses is a direct act of Joseph ne- 
cessarily implied ; the meaning may be, that he could ascer- 
tain the theft by applying to the divines, for which his dig- 
nity and station afforded him every facility. 

(156.) In the details of v. 8 — 27, it is proper to note some 
slight difficulties. In v. 8, Jacob is mentioned, because he 
is the head of all, and therefore properly introduces " the 
children of Israel." Or else this phrase is equivalent to 
'Israelites,' as 'children of Eber," x. 21, is to 'Hebrews,' 
and consequently includes Jacob himself. — The order in 
which the names of the children are given is as follows : 
(1) Leah's children; Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, 
Zebulon ; (2) Zilpah's ; Gad, Asher ; (3) Rachel's ; Joseph, 
Benjamin; (4) Bilhah's; Dan, Naphthali. — Shuckford, ubi 
sup. p. 198, supposes that the names of the other sons 
were originally added to Reuben's, and have been lost. 
But this is a mere conjecture, and in Num. xxvi. 5, the list is 
similar. 

Verse 15. To introduce Jochabed from Ex. vi. 20, in 
order to make up the number thirty-three, is exceedingly 
unreasonable, unless it be supposed to have fallen out of the 
text in this place, for which there is no warrant. It is far 
better to allow a popular and somewhat loose phraseology, 
and to include Jacob himself in the reckoning. Of course, 



356 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

Dinah must be added, and the sons of Pharez, as those of 
Beriah are in v. 17. Er and Onan were dead. The word 
" daughters" is an enallage numeri, the plural for the singular, 
as in v. 23, the term " sons." 

Verse 20. Here and elsewhere the Septuagint differs 
greatly from the Hebrew text. Perhaps it is interpolated. 
It is by no means important to reconcile the two. Compare 
Num. xxvi. 29, 1 Chron. vii. 14, 20. In v. 27 also, the Sep- 
tuagint reads nine instead of two, disagreeing with v. 20, and 
without the sanction of one ancient version. — In Acts vii. 
14, the number of Jacob's family that settled in Egypt is 
said to have been seventy-five ; here, seventy. The com- 
mentators, and particularly Kuinoel on the Acts, state the 
various ways of reconciling this discrepancy. Dr. Hales, 
ubi sup. Vol. II. p. 160, attempts to remove the difficulty 
thus. Excluding Jacob, the father, and Joseph and his two 
sons, who were already in Egypt, the number is sixty-six. 
To this he adds nine wives, Judah's being dead, Joseph's 
already in Egypt, and Simeon's being also dead, which he 
infers from the fact that Shaul was the son of a Canaanitish 
woman, (v. 10 ;) which will hardly be allowed much weight 
as an argument. — I suppose St. Stephen gave the commonly 
received number, founded on the Septuagint, as St. Paul 
also most probably does in Gal. hi. 17 ; without, in either 
case, authorizing the enumeration of that version. 

(157.) Jablonski, ubi sup. Tom. II. p. 77 — 224, places 
Goshen in upper Egypt, in the prefecture of Hercules, 
vo/xo£ 'Hgaxksu<rr,g, an island made in the Heptanomis, by means 
of a canal connected in two places with the Nile, and called 
to this day ' the canal of Joseph.' But, notwithstanding the 
very extensive discussions of this learned writer, the facts 
stated in the history of the Exode seem evidently to show, 
that it must have been situated east of the Nile, in lower 



CHAP, xxxvu. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 357 

Egypt, and not a great distance from the western arm of 
the Red Sea. It was probably near the ancient Heliopolis, 
and being a flat country, and distinguished for the richness 
of the soil, and the excellence of its pasturage, was in all 
respects most suitable for the Hebrews, both with respect 
to their residence, and the facilities it afforded for their re- 
moval. In Gen. xlvii. 11, it is named, either in whole or in 
part, " the land of Rameses." The author just referred to, 
ubi sup. p. 136, explains this word by 'men of sheep,' 'per- 
sons leading the pastoral life ;' and supposes the name to 
have been applied by the Israelites, meaning ' shepherd 
country.' But the city of the same name mentioned in Exod. 
i. 11, as built or at least repaired and ornamented by the 
Israelites, he identifies with On or Heliopolis,* now called 
by the Arabs Ain shemesh, ' eye or fountain of the sun ;' and 
he analyses the word, so as to derive the meaning of ' coun- 
try' or 'place of the sun.' p. 138, 139. Goshen is often 
called in the Septuagint Tscfsv or rstfs^ 'A^a/3('acr, as it lay con- 
tiguous to the latter country, and the name Arabia was 
anciently employed, somewhat loosely, to comprehend all 
that region of land east of the Nile, and bordering on Ara- 
bia properly so denominated. See Bryant's Analysis, Vol. 
VI. p. 105 ss. ; Rosenmiiller on Gen. xlv. 10; and his A. 
und N. Morgenland, Vol. I. p. 215. — The hypothesis of 
Jablonski is examined and refuted by Michaelis in his Sup- 
plementa ad Lexica Hebraica, under WS, p. 371 — 381. 
On the situation of Goshen, see also Buddseus, Hist. Eccles. 
V. T. Per. iii. sect. iii. § 13, Tom. I. p. 330. 

That the Mitzraim to which the Israelites went was not 
Egypt, but a country in sandy Arabia, is a theory main- 



* N. B. The Septuagint in Exod. i. 11, evidently distinguishes them 



358 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

tained by Beke ; but how unsuccessfully, is shown in the 
London Quarterly Review for November, 1834. 

(158.) Instead of "he removed," (v. 21,) the Septuagint, 
agreeing with the Samaritan Pentateuch, and followed by 
the Vulgate, reads, 'he subjected,' xa<rs£ouXw(Ta<ro. The sub- 
stitution of a 1 for a "I in the word T5?n accounts for this 
meaning ; which, it must be granted, agrees very well with 
the context, and expresses the feudatory condition to which 
the people were reduced under the monarch. If the present 
Hebrew reading be correct, the meaning may be, that 
Joseph, having secured to the crown the right of all the 
lands, made a new distribution to the former owners, trans- 
ferring them, however, to residences remote from their na- 
tive places, thus obliging them to form new associations, 
and lessening the probability of sedition. See Grotius in loc. 
Q^3^ " to cities," will then be elliptical for, ' from cities to 
cities,' as the Targum renders it. If it should be said, that 
such an arrangement would be a wanton exercise of power, 
indicating the arbitrary will of a tyrant, rather than the 
benevolence of a kind and equitable governor, the evident 
answer is, that we are too little acquainted with the internal 
condition of Egypt at that time, to enable us to form a right 
judgment in the case. Such a distribution of persons and 
property may have been necessary, in order to secure the 
peace and safety of the community. — Another interpreta- 
tion, however, has been proposed, namely, that Joseph re- 
moved the people from the country to their respective cities, 
for the more convenient distribution of food ; and that this 
regulation extended throughout the whole of Egypt. This 
view agrees, no doubt, with the Hebrew, and requires no 
ellipsis. But it seems inconsistent with the context, for the 
twenty-first verse is closely connected both with the preceding 
and subsequent, making the removal spoken of an immediate 



CHAP. XXXVii. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 359 

result of what had just been stated ; whereas, if the chief or 
only object to be effected were convenience, it might be 
supposed that the regulation would have been adopted from 
the first. Perhaps, however, as the severity of the famine 
increased, and the repeated failures of the Nile to overflow 
its banks augmented the sterility of the soil, the inhabitants 
entirely abandoned all agricultural efforts, and, at Joseph's 
direction, removed to their respective cities. On the cessa- 
tion of the famine, they may have returned to their former 
residences. — It is evident, that the people do not consider 
Joseph's arrangement as a hardship ; on the contrary, they 
regard him as their benefactor and saviour. 

(159.) Instead of "head of the bed," in v. 31, the Sep- 
tuagint has ' top of his staff,' reading fltpfa for M&fa, and this 
is followed by the apostle in Heb. xi. 21. The idea is, that, 
bent down by years and infirmities, the venerable Jacob 
leaned on his trusty staff, the companion of his wanderings, 
(see xxxii. 11,) and in this posture gave thanks. In the place 
just referred to, however, another word, bu)fa, is used for 
" staff." — The common reading and translation are quite 
perspicuous. The patriarch turns his face toward the pil- 
low of his bed, to exclude from his mind all external objects, 
while he expresses his gratitude to God. Both Symmachus 
and Aquila retain the word 'bed;' and this meaning appears 
to be sanctioned by 1 Kings i. 47, "and the king bowed him- 
self upon the bed ;" for, although the word there employed is 
i3ipfa, yet the whole turn of the expression is the same as 
that of the text. Compare also, for the general sentiment, 
2 Kings xx. 2 : " then he turned his face to the wall and 
prayed." 

(160.) The nature of the case requires this, and probably 
the Hebrew expresses it. The Septuagint and Vulgate un- 



360 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

doubtedly do ; the former has ivaXXaf rag x?<£a£, and the 
latter commutans manus. 



(161.) It cannot be denied that in v. 15, 16, the " God" of 
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is identified with " the Angel" 
who is said to have " redeemed" the patriarch " from all 
evil," and whom he invokes to " bless the lads." It is cer- 
tain, therefore, that Jacob regards this being as divine. 

(162.) With xlviii. 22, compare John iv. 5. See also Gen. 
xxxiii. 18, 19, and Josh. xxiv. 32, from which it would ap- 
pear that this property was originally purchased by Jacob. 
Probably, after Jacob's removal mentioned in the thirty-fifth 
chapter, it had been seized by the Hittites, (called here by 
the general name of Amorites,) from whom it had subse- 
quently been forcibly recovered by the patriarch. 

(163.) The genuineness of Jacob's dying address to his 
sons was questioned by Le Clerc, and since his time, has 
been denied by several German critics, who are unwilling 
to allow it a higher antiquity than the age of David. A no- 
tice of the chief writers on both sides of this question may be 
seen in Rosenmuller's note on the first verse. He acquiesces 
in the generally received opinion, that we have the declara- 
tions of the dying patriarch, which his children and their 
posterity had been careful to preserve. The objections 
which have been urged against this opinion are of very little 
weight : indeed, to the consistent believer in divine revela- 
tion, of none at all. The unusual elevation of the style is 
altogether in character with the subject of the address and 
its poetic conformation, and somewhat of sublimity might be 
expected in such a speaker and on such an occasion. And 
it may well be assumed, that Jacob had some natural poetic 
talent, which the circumstances in which he was, and the re- 



chap, xsxvii. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 361 

mote future towards which he looked, would naturally have 
called into exercise. Moreover, his address is in part prophe- 
tic. The inspired mind of the patriarch sees distant events, 
and describes them in the same manner as other prophets 
exhibit their revelations : in language considerably figurative, 
and in general terms, sufficiently clear indeed to constitute 
predictions, and yet not so perspicuous in particulars, as his- 
tory, written subsequently to the facts and circumstances an- 
nounced, would naturally have described them. The ground 
on which the genuineness of this portion of Genesis has been 
denied, would, if admitted, do away whatever is properly 
prophetic in the sacred scriptures ; and in fact, this is the re- 
sult to which neological principles have led their advocates. 

The simplicity with which some of the opponents of the 
genuineness of this chapter state their views may almost be 
considered as amusing. " The most natural view (says Va- 
ter,) that can be adopted after reading this beautiful poem, 
is certainly this : that it was sung at a time when the Israel- 
itish tribes held possession of the land of Canaan, and had ex- 
perienced the fates which are herein so clearly described." 
And Bertoldt, after remarking that " criticism can have no 
other object in view than to establish and elucidate historical 
truth," infers, that " consequently an inclination has for along 
time prevailed, to consider as interpolations and additions of 
a later age, whatever the Pentateuch contains, which mani- 
festly cannot have been written by Moses, with the ordinary 
natural powers of a man." See Hengstenberg's Authentic 
des Pentateuchs, II. p. 181, who very properly observes, that 
it requires neither art nor wit to discover anachronisms on 
such principles as these. 

Herder, in his fifth letter on the study of theology, p. 62, 

supposes, that the well known character of Jacob's sons 

suggested to the dying patriarch the germ of his predictions 

respecting the descendants of each. As we are very im- 

46 



382 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART xl , 

perfectly informed of the actions and characteristics of each 
of these individuals, and also of each tribe, we cannot go 
much beyond conjecture in relation to such a point. The 
reference to some facts in the lives of Reuben, Simeon, 
Levi and Joseph, is in favor of Herder's supposition. If the 
history of each trite had been particularly detailed in the 
Bible, Jacob's last declarations would no doubt be clearer, 
and their prophetic character the more fully illustrated. 

(164.) Notes on xlix. :. 

v. 2. tWfi rmn s 853. 'In future ages, hereafter.' This 
phrase, which is sometimes applied to the time of the Mes- 
siah and the dispensation of the Gospel, as in Isa. ii. 2, Mic. 
iv. 1, is frequently used in the general sense of futurity. See 
Num. xxiv. 14, Deut. iv. 30, Dan. ii. 28. The contents of 
the chapter prove this to be the meaning here. 

3. ^JiS* n^'aTl ^'3 fiftS ^3 ^^l- 'Reuben, my 
first-born art thou, my strength, and the beginning of my 
power.' The latter expressions have been supposed to con- 
vey the idea of vigor, beyond what might be thought to 
belong to children born in a more advanced age of the 
parent. Compare "ton and ijb^ tVffiJ&'l in Deut. xxi. 17; 
and see Ps. lxxviii. 51, cv. 38. The Septuagint translates 
this phrase in Deuteronomy, and here by dgxn rhvuv j/,2, 
which gives the general idea of priority of birth, and per- 
haps nothing more is intended. The same language is used 
by Virgil in the Mneid, I. 664, where Venus addresses her 
son in these terms : 

" Nate, meas vires, mea magna potentia." 

See also Ovid, Met. v. 365. 

T2 ItTH ^$*P ^$1- ' The superiority of excellence, and 
the superiority of dignity,' that is, the abstract for the con- 
crete, ' chief in excellence, and chief in dignity.' Fl&tp 



CHAP. XXXVII. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 363 

is used for excellence in Job xiii. 11, and perhaps in Gen. iv. 7. 
T^ is often expressive of dignity, (compare Hab. iii. 4,) and 
is sometimes translated in the Septuagint by doga, and ti^. 
See Ps. lxviii. 35, (34.) xxix. 1, xcvi. 7, Isa. xii. 2. It is 
generally rendered in this passage by ' strength' or ' power.' 
Thus our English translation, De Wette, and Rosenmiiller. 
But the parallelism with t^tp is better preserved by trans- 
lating it ' dignity,' and then both the clauses of the verse, 
£")S$19 1£P and T3? Iff?., express the same general idea of 
majesty. Dathe gives a similar view of the meaning : prin- 
ceps dignitate, princeps honore ; and the Vulgate version of 
the latter clause is, major in imperio. The Chaldee para- 
phrases explain the whole passage of the rights of primo- 
geniture, priesthood, and royalty, taken away by the patri- 
arch from his eldest son, and conferred respectively on 
Joseph, to whom was given the double portion, (compare 
1 Chron. v. 1,2, Gen. xlviii. 5,) on Levi, from whom sprang 
the sacerdotal family, and on Judah, who was the ancestor 
of the line of David. 

4. ^fliSTrblS: tD^725 TH3. ' Lasciviousness, (bursting 
out, or boiling over.) like water, thou shalt not be chief.' It 
is not easy to determine the meaning of THS. It occurs 
only four times in the Bible ; twice in the form of the parti- 
ciple Benoni tTTHJsD, meaning light and vicious persons, 
Jud. ix. 4, Zeph. iii. 4, once as a noun in the construct state, 
QlTPT/jS, their lightness, Jer. xxiii. 32, and in this place. In 
Syriac "j-^s means ' to be lascivious,' and the noun in the 
emphatic form, ]j.oy*s f is used for lasciviousness in the 
Syriac version, 2 Cor. xii. 21, Eph. iv. 19. This significa- 
tion suits the context, and may be implied in the other three 
places where the word is used. If the phrase " like water" 
be intended to illustrate the clause immediately following, 
the force of the comparison will lie in this, that the insolent 



364 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

and lascivious conduct of Reuben is likened to water, which 
breaks through all restraint, and spreads its desolating inun- 
dation over the private and most highly cultivated garden. 
Or else, more probably, the figure is taken from water 
swelling and foaming and boiling in a pot, so as to over- 
flow its sides, as Gesenius thinks. See his Lexicon, and also 
his Commentatio de Pentateuchi Samaritani Origine, &c. 
p. 33. If the figure were abandoned, the idea might be ex- 
pressed thus : ' unrestrained in lasciviousness.' I have sub- 
stituted the adjective for the noun, in accommodation to the 
English idiom. The Vulgate version is, effusus es sicut 
aqua ; the Septuagint, i%j{3g'«fr) S fo v8ug, thou hast burst out 
in insolence like water. Water when poured out, sinks into 
the ground, or evaporates in the air, without the possibility 
of being gathered again, (compare 2 Sam. xiv. 14) ; thus 
the figure will intimate Reuben's loss of supremacy, which 
is fully expressed in that clause. — But most probably the 
connexion of this phrase is with the preceding word. 

T5& ^5P£ 0^? ^5- 'Because thou ascendedst the 
bed of thy father.' See Gen. xxxv. 22. 

J fib? W^ 1 Flbbn Tl*. 'Then didst thou pollute 

it. — He ascended my couch.' Dathe would connect these 
two clauses, and read rib?, in the infinitive ; and, therefore, 
he translates the whole thus : polluisti stratum meum isto 
ascensu, or, ascendendo, and De Wette agrees with him : 
entweihtest mein Lager besteigend. There is more force, 
however, in considering the latter clause as conveying an 
abrupt declaration of the patriarch's injured feelings, when 
he recollected the insolent and libidinous attack which his 
eldest son had made upon his domestic peace. The change 
of person, which is very common in Hebrew poetry as well 
as in all other, places the speaker's indignation in a stronger 
light, and makes him appeal for its justice to the sympathies 
and feelings of all who heard him. 



CHAP, xxxvii. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 365 

5. d^tTS* ^b] p'^tf. 'Simeon and Levi are brethren.' 
They wei*e the sons of Leah, (see Gen. xxix. 33, 34,) children 
of the same mother, and of the same character and disposi- 
tion, which is no doubt the idea intended to be conveyed. Com- 
pare the use of ujoun Matt, xxiii. 31. J d«T£rO£ SpH ^. 

6 Instruments of violence are their swords.' It is impossible 
to say with certainty what is the sense of this place. It 
refers to the history in chap, xxxiv. The chief difficulty 
lies in the word dtT£T"Qfa, the meaning of which, as it never 
occurs elsewhere, has been sought in the cognate languages. 

y 

Dathe derives it from the Syriac, 5£>o ' to betroth,' and 
translates thus : sponsalia cruenta perfecerunt ; referring of 
course to the negotiations relating to Dinah's marriage in 
xxxiv. 8 — 24. But, as it does not appear that Simeon and 
Levi took a more prominent part in this matter than their 
brothers, and as the marriage was not effected, this transla- 
tion is not supported by the history. — De Dieu and others 
appeal to the Ethiopic and Arabic for the sense of * consul- 
tations, machinations,' and this seems to be the meaning of 
the Septuagint, <fvvs<re\£<fav uSixlav £% aigksus dvrCJv. All these 
versions require a different reading of the first word, viz. 
^5 for ^b^, and this has the sanction of the Samaritan Pen- 
tateuch, which reads ibD. The meaning will then be: 'they 
accomplished or executed their iniquitous plots ;' and this 
agrees with the next verse, although it is not therefore ne- 
cessarily the true exposition. — Our translation, " their habi- 
tations/' is derived from STVD-ft, said by some Jewish com- 
mentators to be equivalent to ""Ittfa, 'a dwelling,' (see Ps.lv. 
16,) or rather, a sojourning. Rashi mentions this meaning, 
although he prefers another. " The word denotes a sword, 
in Greek ^a^'fa* Another interpretation : d*"P£"lT"Cft, in 
the land, JDJnTftfa, of their sojourning, they employed in- 



366 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XL 

struments of violence, as ^pfcTT^btbl "TtTTTdto, (Ezek. xvi. 
3,) and thus the Targum of Onkelos." In this interpreta- 
tion Aben Ezra acquiesces: "in my opinion it is equivalent to 
^tlYTOfc (Ezek. xvi. 3,) the 1 being omitted." The Tar- 
gum translates the clause thus : " strong men in the land 
of ' their sojourning/ *|l»1'tnitntl, they exercised power." — 
The Vulgate version is, vasa iniquitatis bellantia, and Jerome 
says that, according to the Hebrew verity, it is vasa iniquitatis 
arma eorum. Quaes, in Gen. Tom. II. p. 545. This interpre- 
tation is founded upon the opinion, just given from Rashi, 
that rnjfa is the same word as jxa^ai^a of the Greeks, and 
that it was introduced into their language, along with many 
others, from the east. See Rosenmiiller in loc. and Drusius, 
notas majores, in Crit. Sac. Tom. I. P. I. p. 1077 ; also Gese- 
nius, who remarks that "this interpretation is implied by R. 
Elieser in Pirke Aboth," c. 38; "Jacob cursed their swords, 
(that is, those of Levi and Simeon,) in the Greek tongue." 
Upon the whole, it is probable that this version has as strong 
claims as any other ; perhaps, indeed, it is to be preferred. 
It is given by Luther : ihre Schwerdter sind morderische 
Waffen ; who is followed by Rosenmiiller and De Wette, the 
latter of whom expresses the sense in these terms : Werk- 
zeuge des Frevels ihre Schwerter. Compare the language 
in xxxiv. 25. " Simeon and Levi took each man his sword." 
6. ^tiSJ &i£"ri<«S EiD^. ' In their secret council enter 
not, my soul.' There can be no doubt that diQ refers to 
the project to destroy the Shechemites, which the sons of 
Jacob had planned and executed, and that he intends to de- 
clare in the strongest terms his abhorrence of their conduct. 
But the antithesis with Ebilp in the next clause makes it 
most probable, that their private meeting to concert and ar- 
range the scheme is what the word is intended to convey. 
This is a very usual signification of 1iD, and this may be 



CHAP, xxxvil. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 367 

the meaning of (3x\'o and consilium in the Septuagint and 
Vulgate.— ^5 "infrbBJ d bfij?3. ' In lneir assembly do 
not join my heart.' TidS, which literally means * honor] is 
used here, as in Ps. xvi. 9, and other places, for the noblest 
part of human nature ; and therefore, in order to preserve 
the parallelism with 'soul,' it is best to translate it ' heart.'* 
The Septuagint version of this clause is as follows : Kai sirl 
tji tfug-ixtfej aurwv ^ igitfcu <ra yrfara (xh. The translator seems 
to have read ^Hdd "^H^rb^ ; the liver being regarded by 
the Greeks as the seat of the passions. IH^I is the apocopated 
future of <"HH, to be enflamed, angry, and conveys the sense 
of wrathful excitement. 

niti Tip? dp^d^l tZha W# &S&O ^. 'For in their 
anger they slew men, and in their wantonness, (their wanton 
rage.) they destroyed a city.' Rosenmiiller takes W& collec- 
tively for men, that is, the males of Shechem, who were all put 
to death. This accords with the Syriac translation, which is 
plural, and it is agreeable to usage. See Judg. viii. 22. In 
his version of the latter clause, he follows the Septuagint, 
sv <nj eir&v^ia aurwv svsu£oxoVy]tfav rau^ov : " in their desire, 
(their rash, headstrong wantonness,) " they hamstrung the 
oxen," thus cruelly destroying them. Compare Josh. xi. 
9. He means that portion only of the cattle which it 
was found impracticable to drive away, as it is certain 
from xxxiv. 28, 29, that what is here said cannot be un- 
derstood of all. Perhaps, if this translation be admitted, 
Tto is employed figuratively to denote men of distinction, 

* It is far more poetic and spirited to give to the future *ltj£) 
an imperative meaning, which is very common, than to throw the 
clause into a narrative form, as Gesenius has done : "in their assembly 
my soul was not present, (non intermit.") This is too tame for the 
elevated character of the context. 



368 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

princes, like 15 and T?L!S}. See Ps. xxii. 13, lxviii. 31. It 
will then be a climax in reference to tT 1 ^ in the parallel 
clause. De Wette gives the same translation as Rosen- 
miiller. So also Herder, in his sixth letter on the Study of 
Theology, p. 70 : "den edlen Stier entnervten." But as it is 
reasonable to think that the patriarch, intending to express 
his detestation of his children's behavior, would not pass un- 
noticed the chief work of ruin, and as the history tells us 
that the city was destroyed, it seems preferable to adopt the 
reading IVfl, ' a wall,' which has the sanction of the Chal- 
dee, Syriac, and Vulgate versions. It will then be figura- 
tive for ' city.' 1P^, which properly means ' to root out,' is 
applied in Zeph. ii. 4, to the complete destruction of a city. 
In Syriac this meaning is very frequent, and Michaelis, in 
his edition of Castell's Lexicon, p. 669, 670, has given 
several examples, with the view of illustrating the word in 
the place before us. The Chaldee "lp? is used to express 
the entire overthrow and ruin of nations. See Jer. i. 10, 
xviii. 7, or Buxtorf's Talmudic and Chaldee Lexicon, Col. 
1652. — l"i^) is plainly to be taken in a bad sense for ' self- 
will, wantonness.' In order that it may correspond with 
the parallel word E)&, I have translated it ' wanton rage.' 
Dathe has, in furore suo muros destruxerunt. 

7. : b^nip^n dJpSgft apJJflSl &p|n^. ' I will disperse 
them among Jacob, and will scatter them among Israel/ 
As the words ' Jacob' and ' Israel' are plainly used for the 
nation, 5 is best rendered by ' among.' The prophets are 
often said to do what they announce or predict. See Isa. 
vi. 10, Jer. i. 10, Hos. vi. 5. Poetry adopts the same lan- 
guage. Thus Silenus surrounds the sisters of Phaeton in 
moss, Phaetontiadas musco circumdat, that is, he sings their 
transformation. Virg. Eel. vi. 62. Compare also the use of 
movit in the Georgics, I. 123. The meaning seems to be 



CHAP, xxxvn. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 369 

this : ' although these brothers have been inseparably united 
by congeniality of disposition, their posterity shall not dwell 
contiguous in the promised land, or occupy one continuous 
tract, like the other tribes.' Compare Josh. xix. 1—9, from 
which it seems probable, that the portion allotted to Simeon 
must have been small, as it had been a part of Judah's. 
This is confirmed by 1 Chron. iv. 33 — 43. The Levites had 
cities appropriated to them among the rest of the tribes ; 
and, although in many respects the curse of their ancestor 
was converted into a blessing, there can be no doubt, that, 
during thosa frequent and long periods of Israelitish history 
when the people abandoned themselves to idolatry, the Le- 
vites were deprived of their legal rights. See Rosenmiiller 
in loc. — It is a Jewish tradition, mentioned in the Jerusalem 
Targum, that multitudes of Simeon's posterity were scat- 
tered among the other tribes in the capacity of teachers ; 
so that the Hebrews were accustomed to say, that every 
poor scribe and schoolmaster was a Simeonite. See Fagius 
and Drusius in Crit. Sac. Tom. I. p. 1049, 1079. 

8. ^W* ^YP ftiTI& n 1 !^. 'Judah, thy brethren will 
praise thee.' The Hebrew words for Judah and praise are 
derived from the same root. Compare Gen. xxix. 35. This 
leads to a paronomasia in the original which a translation 
cannot express. Some commentators render the words thus : 
1 thou art Judah, thy brethren will praise thee* as if Jacob 
had said, thou art what thy name imports, and shalt be the 
praise and glory of thy brethren. This interpretation ap- 
pears to be sanctioned by Aben Ezra ; "TfatEO '<lf"l& im^ 
^n&S ^"ITP "pi " Judah (art) thee ; according to thy 
name, and thus shall thy brethren praise thee." Compare 
vthgos and irirga. in Matt. xvi. 18. The patriarch undoubtedly 
alludes to the meaning of his son's name, as he does also in 
the case of Dan, but it may be questioned whether the He- 
47 



370 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

brew ought to be translated, ' thou art Judah.' Most pro- 
bably HFl^ is pleonastic with the suffix of A^IV for thee 
simply ; as SlTjpft in $17251 D^T 15$ in Ps. ix. 7, ' their re- 
membrance has perished :' where see Rosenmuller. Such 
pleonasms are frequent in Arabic, and not unusual in He- 
brew. Compare ^5^. ^3 in 1 Sam. xxv. 24, and d!D?22 EFl^ 
in 2 Chron. xxviii. 10, and ^5$ ^Fl^S in Zech. vii. 5 ; and 
see Schultens, Opera Min. p. 129, 130, 180, 181, 354, 355. 
I have therefore followed the Septuagint and Vulgate ver- 
sions : 'I^a, Oe aivetfaitfav 6i d.8s\<p6i tfa' Juda, te laudabunt 

fratres tui. — ^5^ Cp25 tjlr* ' Tn y nand sha11 strike tne 
backs of thine enemies.' Literally, the translation would be, 
' thy hand upon the back.' As the clause is elliptical, it 
seems best to supply the ellipsis with some such phrase as, 
* shall strike.' Compare Isa. ix. 3, (4,) where ifapti ftfelQ 
is well rendered by Gesenius, in his translation, ' the stick 
which strikes his back.' The word tp^ is frequently used 
for back in the phrase, ' giving the back to pursuers,' in other 
words, ' putting the enemies to flight.' See Ex. xxiii. 27, 
Josh. vii. 8, 12. The Septuagint version is ai -/si^k (fa &*l vwr*. 
The Chaldee of Onkelos gives the general sense tlT 
- b? DDtlScl, ' thy hand shall prevail against thine enemies.' 
The patriarch announces to Judah, that his posterity shall 
be victorious over their foes. In the next clause he declares, 
that their superiority shall be acknowledged by the respect 
and submission of all the other tribes. 

9. rrns&S T^T n? tt£? h 55 q?P£ ni*&r\ TO& n^ 

: iS^pl ^12 ^Sbj 5 !. 'A lion's whelp is Judah. From the 
prey, my son, thou hast gone up ! He bent, couched down 
like a lion, and like a roaring lion : who will rouse him !' 
The boldness and strength of the tribe are still the subject 
in the mind of the prophet, which he expresses in figurative 



chap, xxxvii. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 371 

language usual among the Hebrew poets. See Deut. 
xxxiii. 20. It may be observed, that there is a gradation 
in the use of the metaphor here employed. First, the 
comparison is to a lion's whelp, then to a full grown lion, 
and lastly to the same animal, whose fierceness is denoted 
by his terrific roar. Several commentators understand 
by the word fcO^b a lioness, whose fierceness, especially 
when protecting her young, is appalling. The change of 
person makes the description very graphical and nervous, 
and is quite poetic. Some interpreters explain i1 n 23? by 
* increasing, growing strong.' Thus Dathe : crevistiexprasda; 
and De Wette, vom Raube wirst du wachsen. If this inter- 
pretation be admitted, the expression will denote that increase 
of strength which the posterity of Judah should acquire by 
the successful results of warlike enterprise. Most probably 
it refers to the lion's going up to his lair in the mountains 
after having seized upon his prey, and conveys this mean- 
ing : ' thou wilt return victor to thy [secure and impreg- 
nable] dwelling, bearing off the spoils of the enemy.' Thus 
Rosenmiiller in loc. 

io. i? -phi ^S5a pjanfci rmmfc &:y©' n^-ab 

J tPfc? frfij^ Ibl fi>E> BiSp^. ' Authority shall not de- 
part from Judah, neither shall he want a lawgiver, until he 
comes to whom (it belongs), and him the nations shall obey.' 

The interest which has always been attached to this verse, 
must be my apology for more than ordinary particularity, and 
before I examine its meaning, I must be allowed to give the 
most important of the ancient versions. The Septuagint 
and Vulgate are omitted ; as, whatever they contain which 
has a bearing on the principal topic of the prophecy will be 
produced under the exegetical discussion, and they are readi- 
ly accessible. I add also the original authorities, that the 
reader may not be obliged to depend on the translations. 



372 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part xi. 

Chaldee Targum of Onkelos. 'jttb/ltf IS? ^XT*% 

WT^? aftb?-^? ^rriw-^pss &$$Q\ rrprn tvz&ib 

" One that exercises authority shall not depart from the house 
of Judah, nor a scribe from his children's children forever, 
until Messiah comes, whose (literally, who of him,) is the 
kingdom, and whom (lit. him,) the nations shall obey." 
Jerusalem Targum, q& tt^ m^fe ^fe •jftoS ab 

J&^ial ^01?^ ^? "Kings shall not cease from the 
house of Judah, nor scholars, (or, skilful) teachers of the 
law, from his children's children, until the time that king 
Messiah comes, whose is the kingdom, and whom all the 
kingdoms of the earth are about to serve." 

The Samaritan Pentateuch agrees with the Hebrew, ex- 
cept in reading &"Q\ Vb^l, JlbtE. " The sceptre shall not 
depart from Judah, nor one that gives the law from his (lit- 
erally, from between his,) standards, until JlbtB comes, and to 
him the nations shall assemble." 

. P o y y .0 m o y y m o 

byriac version, p^ oV>o .|5oau» _Ls U&J2**. l 1^3 jj 

> V /* . /r> y . o y . y /iv /is/t\ 

/IN .. 7 

■"[ AaViS " The sceptre shall not remove from Judah, nor an 
interpreter from between his feet, until he comes whose it is, 
and for him will the nations wait." 

To this view of the most important versions, I add a 
translation of the commentary of Rashi, and the principal 
portions of that of Aben Ezra, adhering as closely to the 
phraseology of these writers, as the English idiom will 
allow. Rashi comments thus. " The sceptre shall not 



CHAP, xxxvu. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 373 

depart from Judah. From David and afterwards. These 
are the heads of the captivity in Babylonia, who rule the 
people with the sceptre, who are governors appointed by 
royal authority. Nor a lawgiver from between his feet. 
These are scholars, princes of Israel, say the rabbins. 
Until Shiloh come. King Messiah, whose is the kingdom, 
nbl2, and thus Onkelos. But the Midrash Agada," (old 
rabbinical interpretation.) "explains it by "ID ^12), as it is 
said : fcOlfab iffi "lb'OV 1 (' let them bring presents to him 
that is to be feared.' Ps. Ixxvi. 12.) And to him shall the 
ftTVp^ of the people be. The gathering (tlS^&S) of the 
people : for the 1 is radical." [Then follow some remarks 
on radicals and serviles, after which he proceeds thus.] 
' D n fa^ £lnp\ the gathering of the people, as it is said, ' to 
him shall the nations seek,' (Isa. xi. 10 ;) and like it, (is 
Prov. xxx. 17,) ' the eye that mocketh its father and 
despiseth the gathering of its mother,' (tlHp'O TTJlfTl,) the 
collecting of wrinkles on her face before her old age." (! !) 
He then refers to the use of the word mmD in the Talmud. 
See Buxtorf's Lexicon, col. 1983. 

Aben Ezra. " The sceptre shall not depart from Judah. 
The sceptre, great men, shall not depart from Judah, until 
David comes, who was the beginning of the kingdom of 
Judah :' (that is, as Cartwright explains it, the first king 
of the tribe of Judah.) " And the fact was so. Is it 
not seen that the standard of Judah sets out first ? The 
Lord says indeed, ' let Judah go up first ;' " (referring to 
Judg. i. 1, 2.) "And the meaning of ppTHlQ is scribe, 
because he writes (p"lPP) in books : and the sense of 
between his feet is" (shown from this,) " that it was the 
custom of every scribe to sit between the feet of the elder. 
— Shiloh : some say, according to the way in which the 
Syriac translator explains it, that it is of the same import 



374 



NOTES TO GENESIS. 



as "lbtE." [He then proceeds to give some other views ; 
such as, (1) the name of the place Shiloh, &-Q* 1 being used for 
declining, as it is applied to the sun going down, and thus 
the meaning will be, until Shiloh come to an end or decline, 
referring to Ps. Ixxviii. 60, ' he forsook the tabernacle of 
' Shiloh,' after which it follows in v. 70, ' he chose David his 
servant' ; (2) fiV»E for "DS, the ft for 1 and b^125 in the 
sense of offspring, from embryo or second birth, frnp^ he 
explains like Rashi, and refers to the authority exercised 
by David and Solomon. He remarks also, that the phrase 
until does not imply a departure of the sceptre at the time 
contemplated ;] " but its meaning is like, ' bread shall not 
fail to such an one until the time comes that he shall have 
many fields and vineyards' ; like, ' I will not leave thee, 
until I have done what I have spoken to thee,' that is, that 
he would bring him back to the land." (See Gen. xxviii. 15.) 
The first word to be examined in this passage is tDjSltf. 
Its general sense is that of rod or staff ; and hence it is 
applied, figuratively, to punishment, correction, and to a 
ruler of whose office it was the badge. It is used also for 
a tribe. Its other significations have no bearing on its 
meaning here. It cannot be employed in the third sense, 
for it would be exceedingly frigid to say that a tribe should 
not depart from itself. Neither can the word tribe be 
intended to express the characteristics and peculiarities of 
a tribe, so as to give the sense, that Judah should not cease 
to be a tribe, should not lose its character as such, until 
&c. ; for no use of the w 7 ord supports such a signification. 
Some Jews of comparatively modern date, understand it 
in the first of the above mentioned senses, and explain the 
declaration thus ; the ' Jews shall be an afflicted people, and 
exposed to the oppression of tyranny until the coming of 
the Messiah.' But this cannot be the meaning: for the 



CHAP, xxxvn. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 375 

text speaks of authority resident in the tribe itself, not of 
foreign control ; and the context is altogether at variance 
with the supposition of oppression.* There can be no 
reasonable doubt, that it is used in the second of the above 
senses. 1. This is not only a very common meaning of 
tOitfj but the whole phrase is used to express the loss of a 
nation's authority, in Zech. x. 11. W d^Sft &3tP, 'the 
sceptre of Egypt shall depart.' 2. The antithesis with 
ppnfa requires this sense. This word is used for lawgiver 
in Deut. xxxiii. 21, and elsewhere, and the antithesis is 
sufficiently preserved by translating it so in this place. I 
do not, therefore, see sufficient reason to render it, with 
De Wette and Gesenius, staff of authority, sceptre, thus 
making it express the very same shade of meaning as tD5^P 5 
for although this is often, it is not necessarily, the case with 
Hebrew parallelisms, the different members of which fre- 
quently mark species of the same genus. 3. The con- 
text, which speaks of Judah's power and superiority, will 
not admit any other sense; and lastly, this is supported 
by the ancient versions, of which the Septuagint has afx wv 

Tjysfxsvocr, and the Vulgate, sceptrum — dux. 

Tlbtn Y^fa. Many commentators explain this phrase 
as an euphemism. This is the opinion of Rosenmiiller, who 
refers to Deut. xxviii. 57, and to the similar phrase in Gen. 
xlvi. 26, Ex. i. 5, Jud. viii. 30 ; and this is the idea of the 
Septuagint and Vulgate versions ; sx <rwv fjuj^wv aurS- de femore 
ejus. It is observable, however, that the first of the places 
referred to speaks of the female, and the others, although 
they have in view the male, use the word -IT, the thigh. 
There is therefore a difference in the texts, and they cannot 
be adduced as examples of analogous expression, although 

* This view is fully refuted by Fagius, Drusius, and Cartwright, in 
the Critici Sacri, Col. 1051, 1068, 1105. 



376 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part xi. 

they may be analogous in the general idea. Gesenius, 
under ^3 4, c), follows the Targums : " from the seed, 
offspring, posterity." Ernesti compares the phrase with 
h tgjv #o(5ojv diro-xjugritfoittsv, used by Plato, and h toStiv diei^wroiv, 
by Xenophon, both equivalent to e medio discedere or simply 
abire of the Latins, ' to go out,' remarking that the Hebrews 
were accustomed to use various members of the body for 
the whole man. See Rosenmiiller in loc. Also Hengsten- 
berg, Christologie, I. p. 70, Keith's Translation, p. 58. To 
the instances there given, it may be added, that we say in 
English, * I received at your hands,' meaning * from you' 
Whatever may be the idea on which the use of the phrase 
is founded, there can be no doubt respecting its general 
meaning, which is equivalent to from him, that is, the tribe 
of Judah. 

^3 1$. I have retained the meaning which is usually 
given to this phrase, until, because this is the only meaning 
which it has in the Bible. It is used but four times, exclu- 
sive of the text: Gen. xxvi. 13, xli, 49, 2 Sam. xxiii. 10, 
2 Chron. xxvi. 15. Some interpreters translate it as long 
as ; and this is the version of Dathe, who thinks that the 
parallelism is not given with sufficient accuracy by until, 
as this verse, like the next, evidently consists of two 
hemistichs, the clauses of which correspond with each other. 
His translation is as follows: " Non deerunt reges Judse> 

nee legislators. Quamdiu prolem habebit, ei 

gentes obedient." He remarks also that *!? and ^ *J? 
do not always express the limits of time, but mark also its 
duration ; and that by giving it this sense here, the last 
hemistich, like the first, will consist of two corresponding 
members. This view of the text he derived from Gulcher's 
explicatio nova et facilis loci. Gen. xlix. 10. — Although it be 
granted that Dathe's version does place the parallelism in a 
stronger light than the ordinary translation, it may be 



CHAP, xxxvn. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 377 

doubted whether this circumstance should have so much 
weight as to counterbalance the sense in which **§ *1$ 
is always used. It is certain, that so nice an adjustment 
of the parallel clauses as is frequently to be met with in 
Hebrew poetry does not characterize the whole of this 
prophecy of Jacob, and therefore need not be required in 
this verse : the common translation exhibits as much of this 
quality as can be discovered in some other verses. To the 
objection drawn from the meaning of ^3 *!?, he thinks it 
sufficient to reply with Gulcher, that the phrase does not 
occur often enough to admit of a rule being founded upon 
it, and that ^3 appended to *!?, and other particles, does 
not alter their meaning : hence he concludes that it is 
nothing more than an expletive, like the Greek dv. — What 
force these remarks would be entitled to, if the usual signi^ 
fication of ^5 19 presented an insuperable difficulty in 
ascertaining the sense of the clause, it is unnecessary to 
examine. It suits the passage under consideration as well 
as the others in which it is found, and therefore it has been 
adopted by all the ancient versions.* Some modern Jews 
have endeavored to give to *1? the meaning of forever, 
They have understood the text, either as asserting the 
perpetuity of Judah's authority when the Messiah shall 
have come, (see Fagius in loc. Crit. Sac. p. 1052,) or, as 
declaring that the want of authority shall not be permanent* 
because he is to come to restore it to the tribe. See David 
Levi's Lingua Sacra in TJ. The word *15 is indeed used 

* The Chaldee of Onkelos need not be considered as an exception to 
this statement. This version is as follows: ^fY^'T"'"!? ^J?^?""^? 
KIT^"*?. Here 'W^-'l? is the translation of B&^J 1?, and 

^^b^~1^, is, as well as &PP 125)2, added by the interpreter, and in-; 
tended perhaps as an exegetical paraphrase. 
48 



378 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

to express perpetuity, but never, as in this place, followed by 
^5 # ) and generally connected with some adjunct, as for 
instance, 1?b, 1^ ^S, 1?"] dbitf? and others. If Isa. 
lvii. 15, may be considered as an exception, the meaning 
is different, and the place may be rendered adverbially, thus : 
* who sits (on the throne) eternally.' — This Jewish interpre- 
tation, being founded altogether on difficulties arising out of 
doctrinal views, may be passed over without any further 
remark. 

The word rib^tf, which is next to be examined, has given 
rise to more discussion than any other in the prophecy. 
The first point which must be investigated relates to the 
genuine reading. The varieties which appear in manu- 
scripts are fib 1 ^', Tiblfi, "li^tf, ibti ; the two last occur in 
but few. Jahn, who has examined this subject in his Ein- 
leitung, Theil. I. § 148, says, that the oldest testimony in 
favor of the reading flb 1 ^' is the Targum of the Pseudo 
Jonathan, which is not of higher antiquity than the seventh 
or eighth century ; and that the evidence of even this wit- 
ness is doubtful, inasmuch as his translation, " the least" or 
" youngest of his sons," is too vague to enable us to deter- 
mine whether he read Jibuti or T]j1^. The former, how- 
ever, appears in most Hebrew manuscripts, and in almost 
all the editions. But as both editions and manuscripts are 
comparatively modern, other authorities more ancient must 



* The assertion of Levi is somewhat extraordinary, and not very 
critical, that " according to the common translation, and which, all 
Christians seem to have adopted, the adverb ^3, because, stands for a 
cypher in the text, as no word is given for it." Would he require every 
particle in a Hebrew phrase to have a correspondent term in the ver- 
nacular tongue? "'^ ^ is the phrase for until, and if two words are 
required to express its meaning, the rather inelegant phrase until that 
will meet his objection. 



CHAP, xxxvu. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 379 

be examined. 1. All the manuscripts of the Samaritan 
text read ilD 1 ©, and this reading is preserved in the Samari- 
tan version. 2. The Septuagint translation, ra, diroxii^sva, 
(xutoj, according to some copies, with which Theodotion 
agrees, and 5 oiitoxsiro according to others, with which Aquila 
and Symmachus coincide, may have been obtained from 
nbtl? but not from fibril). 3. These Greek readings are 
supported by Justin Martyr, both in his apology and dialogue 
with Trypho, and also by Epiphanius and Theodoret. 4. 
The translator of the Peshito, Oukelos, and the author of the 
Jerusalem Targum, appear to have read tl^tD, as their ver- 
sions are a paraphrase of this word. 5. In the former part 
of the tenth century the reading Jlb* 1 ^' does not seem to 
have been known in Egypt and Babylon and the adjacent 
countries ; for the Egyptian Saadias, the Gaon, who was 
for two years master of the school of Babylon or Seleucia, 
translated according to the reading J*Ott). Jahn, from whom 
chiefly this view of the evidence is taken, tells us. that in a 
manuscript writing at the end of the thirteenth century 
lib 125 is found as a correction ; from which it is clear, that 
some standard manuscripts, (compare his Introduction, P. I. 
§ iii. p. 131, of the Translation,) by which the correctors were 
governed, contained that reading. Others, however, of the 
same class, read fib 1 ©", for in three manuscripts of the 
thirteenth century it is a correction of flbttf, and in another of 
ibtl). Such corrections were increased about this period, 
and in the fourteenth century the reading Jlb^tB became 
pretty common, and in the next was more generally ex- 
tended, among manuscripts. The external evidence there- 
fore is (he thinks,) decidedly in favor of rib 1 ©', and this 
reading is as well sustained by the internal as the other, if 
not better. In addition to Jahn, as above referred to, see 
W. F. Hufnagel's Versuch iiber 1 Mos. xlix. 10, in the Re- 



380 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[part XI. 



portorium fur Biblische und Morgenlandische Litteratur, 
Theil XIV. p. 240—242. 

In one point of view, the insertion of the yod is of very 
little consequence, as the word may have the same mean- 
ing without as it has with it : in the one case, it will be 
fully, in the other imperfectly written ; iTb*>tp' and rib©' 
are identical in meaning. But, in another point of view, 
the introduction of the yod is important, as an interpre- 
tation which the word may bear without it, could not be 
elicited, if it were written with the yod inserted. Heng- 
stenberg remarks, that " the defenders of the interpretation" 
alluded to " fall into an error, when they conclude, from 
the fact that the old translators adopted this pointing, that 
it was the received one in their time." He supposes it 
4< most likely, that they found the present pointing of the 
word as the received one, but felt obliged to depart from it, 
because, according to it, they could give to the word no 
suitable derivation, while, on the contrary, the pointing 
which they adapted, (rib 1 ®,) agreed with the traditional 
reference of the passage to the Messiah." Christology, 
Keith's Translation, p. 55. He admits, then, that the old 
translators could not derive the meaning which tradition 
had stamped on the text, without assuming the reading 
which Jahn maintains to be the true one. Is it not vastly 
more probable, that this was actually the reading which 
they found ? The meaning which this reading sanctions, 
Hengstenberg allows to have been the traditionary one 
received before " the old translators," in other words, the 
authors of the Targums and of the Septuagint, lived. Its 
very high antiquity, therefore, is admitted. If the reading 
ri^tp were the prevailing one before the times of these 
translators, whence arose the traditionary meaning, which 
induced them to change this reading into ribip, in order to 
adapt the word to the current interpretation ? 



CHAP. XXXVII. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 381 

The meaning of the word must now be considered. 
1. A few expositors have regarded it as the name of a 
place, as the word rib 125 is used in Judg. xxi. 12, 1 Sam. 
iv. 12, and elsewhere, and have translated the passage 
thus : " until he come to Shiloh ;" and an allusion to the 
meaning of the word «lbt2?, to be at rest, has been supposed 
to be intended. The meaning will then be, that the tribe of 
Judah should enjoy the precedence until they came to their 
rest in the land of Canaan, at which time the others sepa- 
rated from this, (which had previously occupied the first 
rank in the march, Num. x. 14,) in order to receive their 
own portion. Against this interpretation, it is sufficient to 
remark, that it is altogether too feeble for the elevated pre- 
dictions of the context, and that it wants coherence with 
the following expressions. Shiloh being a city within the 
limits of Ephraim, did not belong to the tribe of Judah, and 
the connexion between it and the authority of that tribe, is 
at best remote and incidental, while it has none at all with 
the obedience of the nations, which is immediately after- 
wards predicted. The same objections, with others also, 
may be urged against the exposition of Rabbi Samuel, the 
son of Meir, which is given by Mendelsohn, and defended 
by the Dubnian commentator in the nb"lbt> ""[""H. " Until 
he come to Shiloh, (T\b^ for tlTIBb, as in 1 Chron. xviii. 
7, Jer. xxiv. 1, and xxviii. 3,) that is to say, until there 
come a king of Judah, Rehoboam the son of Solomon, who 
came to renew the kingdom of Shiloh which is near to 
Shechem. But then the tribes will depart from him and 
will make Jeroboam king, and only Judah and Benjamin 
shall be left to Rehoboam, the son of Solomon." The latter 
part of the verse he explains of the subjection of the sur- 
rounding nations to Solomon, (1 Kings iv. 24,) and of 
Israel's flocking to Shechem to crown Rehoboam ; 
(2 Chron. x. 1.) To prove the proximity of Shechem to 



382 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

Shilob, he refers to Josh. xxiv. 1, 26, "the sanctuary of the 
Lord" mentioned in the latter text, being then at Shiloh, as 
is evident from Judges xxi. 19, and Jer. xli. 5. 

2. Dathe, with other critics of great name, compares 
ribllf with an Arabic word denoting the membrane which 
envelops the foetus, and then explains it as a metonymy for 
offspring, referring to f°pbt£> in Deut, xxviii. 57, and re- 
marking that fcfc'i is used in relation to birth. See Ps. Ixxi. 
18. Thus his translation is: " quamdiu prolem habebit." 
Concerning this interpretation it is well observed by Le 
Clerc, that it is a conjecture founded on no firmer basis than 
the slender affinity of the terms embryo, second birth, and 
offspring, which is entirely too slight to support it. Besides, 
can any reason be given why this word should be em- 
ployed in so unusual a sense, in preference to IS or 2*1T> 
which are commonly used to denote posterity. 

3. The Vulgate version is, donee veniat qui mittendus est. 
Jerome either used a manuscript which contained the read- 
ing nbljJ, sent, or he mistook the u for a H. The latter 
supposition is the more probable, for, as Jahn remarks 
ubi sup. p. 508, this might easily be done, owing to the 
similarity of the letters, the smallness of the characters in 
his copy, and the weakness of his eyes, of which he com- 
plains ; and because he has actually made this mistake in 
Gen. x. 24, by commuting inbtf with PfbtB. 

4. Rosenmiiller considers the term as an appellative from 
nbtp, to be at rest, analogous to litO^p smoke, from *I&P 
and makes it equivalent to tranquility, that is, the author 
of tranquility, the peace maker, like tOStp* sceptre, for he 
who holds it, that is, the ruler. Thus the word will be 
synonymous with dlbtp "ItB, prince of peace, in Isa. ix. 5, 
and with JltibtzJ, Solomon, that is, the peaceable, (see 1. 
Chron. xxii. 9,) to whom the Samaritans apply the pro- 






CHAP. XXXVii. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 383 

phecy. Hengstenberg adopts this view. He does not 
hesitate to say, that " every thing is in favor of this interpre- 
tation, and that nothing can be said against it." Christology, 
I. p. 67, 8. But I think it involves difficulties which have 
never been satisfactorily solved. Whether n^ti or i"lbtE> 
will bear this translation is somewhat doubtful, as this word 
is never used for tranquility, but iTjbttf. That other 
similar forms do occur, as these two critics show, only 
proves that the word would be in analogy with other words 
really existing ; it by no means proves that there was 
such a word. And as a state of peaceful and happy 
security is expressed by dlDIS, (Gen. xxviii. 21,) and 
as tOjJtB is used to denote the enjoyment of such a state, 
(Judg. viii. 28 ;) it is difficult to conceive why a term 
which occurs no where else should be used here to convey 
the same idea, and also why this term, once employed in 
this sense, should never have been used by subsequent 
writers, particularly by Isaiah in the place referred to. It 
is possible, indeed, that the word may contain an intended 
allusion to this meaning, and thus be considered as a sort 
of paronomasia, so favorite a figure with the Hebrew 
writers. 

5. The word tibx6 seems to be a term compounded of the 
prefix 125, a particle from Tdpfcfc and equivalent to it, mean- 
ing who, and «15 for u to him; that is, literally, 'who 
(there is) to him, he to whom,' and the sentence to be 
elliptical for — until he comes whose (it is), namely, the 
authority implied in the word sceptre and recognised by 
the expectation of those to whom the prophecy was 
directed. Thus "lb 1 © will be equivalent to lb — T£)&, literally, 
' whom to him,' and "lb -ta ltl}& is similar to ^!3r ta ltp^ literally, 
1 whom in thee,' in Isa. xlix. 3. This does appear to be the 
view in which Ezekiel regarded the passage, if, as seems 



384 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

exceedingly probable, he has paraphrased it in xxi. 32, (27,) 
frftp'ftn ib-*^ SEar-'lS 'until he comes to whom the 
right belongs.' Hengstenberg allows it to be undeniable " that 
Ezekiel had this passage in view ; but there is no objection, 
(he thinks,) to understand the words, i he whose is the 
dominion,' as a paraphrase of Shiloh, regarded as a name 
of the Messiah, according to the interpretation" just con- 
sidered. It cannot indeed be denied that the appellation 
* peace' or ' peacemaker,' is not at variance with the peri- 
phrasis, " he whose is the dominion ;" for the establishment 
of peace is quite consistent with the idea of supremacy. 
Still there is no necessary connexion between the two, and 
the "paraphrase" of Ezekiel could be no more than an 
incidental result from the original expression of Jacob. 
According to the view which I am endeavoring to defend, 
" the traditionary reference," which, on the supposition that 
the common punctuation rib^tp is the true one, was inex- 
plicable to the " old translators," who, therefore, " felt obliged 
to depart from it," and to adopt the reading ribtj), is as old 
at least as the time of Ezekiel, and is given by him in his 
paraphrase. 

The objection urged against this analysis of the word is 
that 12) is not used in this way in early Hebrew writings. 
To this it may be replied, that it is so used in Judg. v. 7, 
^iTl?? i?12J ' that I arose' ; in Canticles i. 7, twice, once with a 
ssegol 5l!2?!^tp ' whom (my soul) loveth,' and again with a 
patach n?p|tp ' for why' ; and in viii. 12, ^tj} ' which is mine.' 
Eccles. i. 9, affords several examples of this usage : ~"!"!fa 

ij$?!9} awn fiwsvQ-ftfci <t.h^? *wfi n?W- lt occurs 

also in Job xix. 29 : " that ye may know WE? or VT[lfi that 
(there is) a judgment ;" and perhaps in Gen. vi. 3, dM^. 
This word is explained in the old versions as a particle 



CHAP, xxxvii. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 385 

compounded of 2 f 12) and dS, meaning * because, in that 
indeed/ although some modern critics consider it as the 
infinitive Piel of ^125 or Tl^ to err, with an affix and a 

- T T T 7 

prefix. See Gesenius in yyx6 ; also Rosenmiiller and Dathe 
in loc, the former of whom translates it ' dum errare eos 
facit caro,' and the latter, ' propter errores suos.' But if it 
were certain that X(j is not found in this sense in the Pen- 
tateuch, it would not follow that it was never so used in 
Hebrew writings of equal antiquity, but only that it was not 
common. It is remarked by Jahn, that it is by no means 
surprising that Jacob, who lived so long in Mesopotamia 
among the Syrians,' should have availed himself of a prefix 
which corresponds with the Aramaean Daleth. Hengsten- 
berg, while he takes notice of the objection, candidly allows 
that it " is not of itself sufficient ;" but he remarks, " that 
the supposed ellipsis is so unnatural that scareely an 
analogous example can be found." p. 56. The weight to 
be attached to such an objection as this depends very much 
on individual feeling. I can only express my surprise that 
any one should be pressed by such a difficulty. The 
ellipsis is merely of the substantive verb : " until he come, 
whom (it is) to him," is the literal translation, according to 
the view under consideration. The word which Ezekiel 
introduces is not necessary to complete the sense ; his 
paraphrase only makes it plainer, and this accords with 
prophetic analogy. The use of rib for lb is according to 
the orthography of nT? for IT?, and HFHtD the chethib 
for ltTlO in the next verse. 

This view of the word Mb 1 © is sanctioned by the ancient 
versions. The Greek, & cmtoxswo, ' for whom it is reserved* 
or, to. dtfoxsysva aurw, < the things reserved for him,' supply in 
part the ellipsis, and evidently refer to some person or 
authority, or both, expected to come in a future age. To 
49 



386 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

the same purpose the Targum of Onkelos, which is still 
more paraphrastic, and which seems to have had in view 
the text in Ezekiel : " until the Messiah comes, whose is the 
kingdom." Thus also the Syriac and other oriental ver- 
sions, which, as they agree with the Targum, show that 
this last phrase is not a Jewish addition, but an intended 
paraphrase of TibXf. 

Whether this analysis of the word be well founded or 
not, there is strong reason to believe that the passage does 
relate to the Messiah : and it is not impossible that the word 
employed may have been intended to allude to him as the 
author of peace and quiet felicity. This is merely a con- 
jecture ; but it is worthy of some consideration, as in this 
very chapter such an allusion is contained in the nineteenth 
verse, where Gad, IS, which properly signifies 'good 
luck,' (see the Septuagint iv ruyrjiia Gen. xxx. 11,) is con- 
nected with ""nlS, ' a troop,' and in v. 29, there is a 
paronomasia of t2T}^\ * shall comfort,' with H j, which 
means ' rest.'* To use the language of Rosenmiiller : 
" promittitur itaque tribui JudaB, non recessurum ab eo 
imperium, donee veniat magnus ille princeps, qui extremo 
mundi sevo turbata omnia ad pacem et tranquillitatem sit 
revocaturus, et totius orbis terrarum imperium sit suscep- 
turus." 

Such a view of this text, which makes it a prediction of 
the coming Messiah, coincides with the patriarchal history 
and promises. The annunciation made in paradise of " a 
descendant of the woman" who was to destroy the power 

* Compare Gesenius under l^l 1 ©"], which, he thinks, may "imply 
an allusion to the signification of right, uprightness, contained in the 
root TffiP," while he supposes it "not improbable, that it was a dimi- 
nutive form of the name i^lfey Robinson's Translation, p. 454. 



CHAP. XXXVII. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 387 

of the devil, the frequent repetition of the promise to 
Abraham, that in his posterity " all nations should be 
blessed," are entirely in unison with this interpretation of 
Jacob's much celebrated prophecy. And the imperfect 
knowledge which at that period existed of the nature and 
character of the Messiah's kingdom, will account for the 
obscurity and apparent indefiniteness of the term under 
which he is represented. In this declaration, then, the 
authority of government and legislation is promised to the 
tribe of Judah until the coming of the Messiah : and, 
although the Israelites ceased to be a distinct nation at the 
time of the Assyrian captivity, yet the Jews, who were the 
descendants of that tribe, continued with occasional inter- 
ruptions and oppressions to enjoy their own government 
until the coming of Jesus Christ. Then indeed the sceptre 
did not depart, although the visible and secular rule soon 
became extinct; it was made permanent in his person, 
agreeably to the idea illustrated by Aben Ezra, as before 
cited.* " His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and of 
his dominion there shall be no end." 

It has been supposed by Eusebius and other very 
respectable writers, that " the sceptre departed from Judah" 
on the accession of Herod, who is called " a foreigner," and 
who was not of Jewish extraction. But the fact does not 
warrant the conclusion. The Jewish nation still retained 
the right of self-government. The exercise of the sceptre 
was indeed restricted, but not taken away. Herod's 
government was Jewish government, and was regulated by 
Jewish laws. As well might it be said, that the Roman 
power ceased whenever some foreign adventurer succeeded 
in mounting the throne of the Caesars ; or that the sceptre 

* Hengstenberg defends this view. See p. 59. 



388 NOTES TO GENESIS. 



[PART XI. 



departed from the French nation, when the Corsican 
became their emperor. The civil rights of the Jewish 
people were controlled by the influence of the Romans, but 
they were not entirely taken away until the overthrow of 
the nation. Vitringa has written a very satisfactory dis- 
sertation on this subject in his Observationes Sacra?, Lib. IV. 
cap. v. vii. p. 934-960. 

: d^E? fr^jp*! lb]. The Septuagint has, xui duros ^oo^ox/a 
JSvwv, which is followed by the Vulgate, ' et ipse erit expec- 
tatio gentium.' To the same purpose the Syriac version. 
The translators seem- to have taken the word as a derivative 
from illjj, which in Piel means ' to expect.' Perhaps the 
reading in their copies was obtained from that root. — Others 
render riilp'"!? * congregatio,' " gathering," after the Samari- 
tan, which reads "l£")i"JD\ and which the Samaritan transla- 
tion explains by 1T1MFP, * shall place themselves (shall 
stand,) before.' This is also the translation of Rashi, as I 
have before shown. — Most probably it is derived from an 
Arabic root, meaning ' to obey,' and signifies obedience. This 
sense suits the only other place in which the word occurs in 
Scripture, Prov. xxx. 17. It is the interpretation of the 
best critics, and is supported by the Chaldee of Onkelos, 
&J5P? I^&W FPbl ' and him shall the nations obey.' 

11. i^g ^5 fijjlfcbl riT? }£$ n0&- 'He fastens 
to the vine his ass's foal, and to the choice vine the son of 
his ass.' * 1 '!fcp& is poetical for *(Q&, the ^ being paragogic- 
Thus also in ^JJl, which the Vulgate has considered as a 
pronominal suffix, translating " o fili mi." ' ftJ^IU is the 
same as pift in Isa. v. 2, a very superior species of vine, 
which is called at the present day in Morocco serki. The 
extraordinary fertility of Judah's portion in the promised 
land is here announced : vines of the finest sort shall be so 
common that travellers shall use them for hedges and fences 



CHAP. XXXVII. 



1_ L .] NOTES TO GENESIS. 389 



to fasten their asses to. — The same idea is expressed in the 
next clause in language highly figurative and poetical : ' He 
washes in wine his garments and in the blood of grapes his 
vesture.' f^ is derived by Aben Ezra from the same 
source as Ti"\D)2 in Ex. xxxiv. 33, 34, 35, a veil, covering, 
and made equivalent to it. But it is generally considered 
as imperfectly written by an aphaeresis for £"nd$, as the 
full reading occurs in the Samaritan Pentateuch. Although 
no instance can be produced of the elision of D, yet *lfl for 
W5, ftp f° r *np5> are thought to be analogous examples. See 
Gesenius in verb, and de Pent. Sam. p. 33. He is mistaken, 
however, in ascribing this view of the word to the Jewish 
commentator above named. " Ita Aben Esra, qui scribit : 

qil) nam Iplltfl to nmS." It is true he does so write, 
but he introduces the remark with the words, &Ol (that is, 
YHfa& tE 1 "]) &"1»TO, ' some say that it is ;' and immediately 
adds, mofc 'nnfc '"1TO i^S p^m 'but it is clear to me 
that it is from the same source as JTItDfa.' 

12. : zbm d^tf-^3^ p& d^.y? ^bjn. 'Sparkling 

are his eyes with wine, and white are his teeth with milk/ 
Although d^.5 1 ? fTO v5H is used in reference to an intem- 
perate use of wine, (see Pro v. xxiii. 29,) yet it is unnecessary, 
and would be at variance with the nature of the subject, to 
extend the meaning of the word here any further than to 
denote abundance. Compare the use of "OXD in Gen. xliii. 
34. Profusion of wine and milk seems plainly to be the 
idea conveyed, and this is closely connected with the former 
verse. — The Septuagint, ^a^o<jroio» 6i opSaXfjto; aurS toeg oivov, xai 
Xsuxoi oi 6S6vTsg durS vj yaka, followed by the Vulgate, ' pulchri- 
ores sunt oculi ejus vino, et dentes ejus lacte candidiores, 
more joyous are his eyes than wine, and whiter his teeth 
than milk,' is beautifully expressive of the felicitous condi- 



390 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part xi. 

tion of Judah. Saadias gives the same version. Whiter 
than milk, is also a proverbial expression. See Drusius in 
loc., not® majores. But the other translation is probably 
more correct, as it suits the context rather better, which 
plainly gives the idea of great plenty. 

13. ifi|T-] trh% qin^ *tfn Ipyi* tw qin^ ifpat 

♦ iT5~i>^. * Zebulon will dwell on the sea coast, a coast 
well lined with ships, his territories reach unto Zidon.' In 
our English translation £|in is rendered " haven." Its 
general meaning is undoubtedly coast or shore, or side, and 
so it is constantly translated. See Deut. i. 7, Josh. ix. 1, 
Judg. v. 17, Jer. xlvii. 7, Ezek. xxv. 16; which, exclusive 
of the text, are the only places in which the word occurs. 
Dathe thinks it should have the meaning of haven in the 
second clause of the verse ; but as Rosenmiiller's interpreta- 
tion is simple and easy, and retains the usual sense of the 
word, I have adopted it in the preceding translation. " Erit 
ipse ad littus navium, id est, habitabit ad littus semper navibus 
frequens. lxx. xia dvrog <kol£ o^ov tfXoiwv." The country of Ze- 
bulon extended from the sea of Tiberias to the Mediterra- 
nean, and along the latter as far as Zidon, that is, according 
to Bochart, to Phoenicia. See his Phaleg, Lib. IV. cap. 34. 
p. 302. 

14. :tD?tJft1p5B *p3 f3h EH* "1&EJ "fttott' 1 .. 'Issachar 
is a strong ass, lying down within his borders/ Thus Ho- 
mer compares Ajax to an ass, 

l flg <5' or' ovog #<x£' a^av !wvs/3iyj(J'a<ro ifai^ag 

Nu^j, '&£ for' sVsir' 'Ajavra [liyav xai <ra a. 

II. xi. 557, 562. Cowper's translation, 672 ss. The chief 
difficulty in the verse lies in the word d?£l51Pft. The 
Septuagint translates it xX^w, the Vulgate termini, and the 
Chaldee of Onkelos SOteVTt), ' boundaries, borders.' Thus it 
would be a regular derivative from frlStf, ' to place.' Many of 



CHAP, xxxvil. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 391 

the modern commentators, following Michaelis, derive it from 

the Arabic word JJuu, and explain it by ' water troughs' 
or ' canals for cattle.' Thus Dathe and De Wette. But 
Gesenius remarks that the " root is not used of every kind of 
drink, but only of such as is hurtful, which does not quench 
thirst but augments it." Consequently it is not admissible 
to derive the Hebrew word from it. Rosenmiiller also says 
that the Arabians use it in reference to unwholesome food, 
both meat and drink. He follows the old versions, and in- 
terprets the word of the two borders by which one part of a 
field or country is separated from another adjacent to it. 
This is probably the best course to be pursued by an inter- 
preter, when the data for ascertaining the signification of a 
term are so imperfect. — The whole verse, he thinks, express- 
es the servile character of the tribe, and their quiet enjoy- 
ment of their own district, as well as their attachment to 
agricultural pursuits. This is plainly supported by the next 
verse. 

i6, 17. : banfci ^wti ina?> tbj y*T yi. < Dan win 

rule his people like one of the tribes of Israel ;' that is, he 
will maintain his rank among them. There is a pa- 
ronomasia in the first two words, which a translation 
cannot express. The common English translation of V^ 
in the Old Testament, and of x^'vsiv in the New, is ' to judge,' 
which in some cases is a very proper term. But as these 
words are frequently used in the sense of ' governing, ruling,' 
as is also the corresponding word "DS 1 ©, (see 1 Sam. ii. 10, 
viii. 5 ; Isa. xl. 23,) I have preferred the more general ex- 
pression. The sentiment expressed in the verse appears to 
be this, that Dan will be as able as any other of the tribes 
to advance his own interests and to govern himself by his 
own magistrates. There is no reason to suppose with On- 
kelos that a direct reference to Samson is intended ; the 



392 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

tribe in general seems to be thus characterized. So also in 
the next verse, the craft of the Danites and their destruction 
of their enemies, are expressed by the metaphor of a serpent 
lying in the path, striking with its poisonous fang the heel of 
the unsuspecting horse, and causing him, through the pain 
occasioned by the bite, to throw his rider in the dust. Comp. 
Judg. xviii. 27, 28. The Septuagint renders ISPSfl? by 

18. No view of this clause seems more probable than 
that suggested by Herder and adopted by Dathe. The pa- 
triarch, while he is uttering these predictions respecting the 
character and situation of the tribe of Dan, recollects with 
feelings of devout gratitude the many difficulties and con- 
cealed dangers from which the Almighty had delivered him, 
and expresses his confidence in the divine protection, in the 
deliverance of his descendants from dangers and hostile at- 
tacks, and perhaps in the future spiritual deliverance which 
he had before predicted. The language is comprehensive, 
and admits of a wide application. The extraordinary good- 
ness of God, which Jacob had so often experienced, was 
well adapted to give him composure and elevation of mind 
in his dying moments ; and equally so to raise the hopes of 
his posterity under any trying circumstances in which they 
might afterwards be placed, and to keep alive their faith in 
the future coming of the great deliverer. 

19. JSpy 1-P »=ffT] =&3W! TTI3 1%. 'Gad— a troop 
may press upon him, but he shall press in the end.' Thus I 
have rendered !2P2, following Rosenmuller. He prefers 
this meaning on the authority of Aben Ezra, whose interpre- 
tation is n^lDl^l "l!Dn^ fcOrn, ' but he shall overcome it 
in the end,' or 'afterwards;' and the Arabic of Erpenius. 
Dathe and Gesenius think it means ' the rear,' and the latter 
refers to Josh. viii. 13. This signification has the support 
of the Arabic of Saadias. The sense will then be, that God 



CHAP. XXXVii. 1— L.j NOTES TO GENESIS. 393 

shall put his foes to flight, and drive them before him ; or 
else, that, although his enemies may press him, he shall rout 
their rear. It is not easy to say which of the two interpre- 
tations is correct ; the former is perhaps the more probable. 
The paronomasia which runs through the verse is very 
striking, and Vm^ seems to have been selected on account 
of its alliteration with 1|i, not that the words are synony- 
mous, for the latter, as was before remarked, signifies 'good. 
luck.' Ti^D, which is translated " troop,' does not appear 
to mean an army fully supplied and properly drawn up, but 
rather a band of warriors accustomed to predatory incur- 
sions. See 2 Kings, v. 2; Hos. vii. 1. The Septuagint 
version is : Tao, rfsigatrjgiov r;Si?a-2i<j~i aurov, oivrog 03 ^Bi^a-rsCoSi 
du=rov xara <rooa£, where rfei(>oLT7)(>iov is used for a band of rob- 
bers, tf^y.a XtjoVwv, as Hippolytus explains it. See Schleus- 
ner's Thesaurus in verb, and Rosenmuller in loc. Schneider 
and Passow, in their Greek Lexicons, give the sense of a 
company of pirates, and the former refers to Heliodorus in 
defence of this meaning. 

!l0. This verse expresses nothing more than the fertility 
of Asher's soil and the abundance and excellence of its pro* 
ductions. Compare Deut. xxxiii. 24. 

21. ngm-^S* ifim ")V fiijS^tlW. 'Naphthali 
is a hind let loose; he giveth discourses of beauty.' Bochart, 
in his Hierozoicon, P. I. Lib. III. cap. IS, p. 896, proposed 
another interpretation of this verse, and it has been adopted 
by several modern critics, among whom are Dathe and 
De Wette. His version is this : 'Naphthali is a spreading 
tree, (or terebinth.) which puts forth beautiful branches.' 
The metaphor, as denoting prosperity in general, is too fre- 
quent to require illustration. This translation is favored by 
the parallelism, and has the sanction of the Septuagint ver* 
sion : Ns<pdaXi CiriXs-^og dv^/xivov, itfididxg sv ru) yzwr^a-ri xaXkoc;* 
It requires us to read ";^, (the Jod may be retained, as in 
50 



894 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part XI. 

the plural d 1 ? 1 ^, Isa. i. 29, although the common form of 
the singular is iTtblSJ,) or the construct £lb^, and to alter the 
punctuation of "Hto^ so as to read ^Htofc*. The meaning, 
as exhibited by the present Rabbinical punctuation, is given 
in the English translation : " Naphthali is a hind let loose ; he 
giveth goodly words." Robertson, in his Clavis Pentateu- 
chi, who adheres to this interpretation, remarks, that this 
tribe may be compared to a hind on account of its extraor- 
dinary increase, and its situation in rocky, mountainous dis- 
tricts. Whether the descendants of Naphthali were so nu- 
merous as to sanction his first observation, may be doubted. 
Certainly Deut. xxxiii. 23, to which he appeals, is of too 
general a nature to justify such a representation ; and al- 
though, as he says, the country about Gallilee was exceed- 
ingly populous, so also, it may be replied, was the whole 
country of Palestine. See Num. i. 42, 43, from which, in 
connexion with the rest of the chapter, it does not appear 
that this tribe was particularly numerous in comparison with 
the others. If this meaning be the correct one, I should 
rather think that the stateliness and beauty of the gazelle, so 
celebrated among the eastern poets, constitute the point of 
comparison. The prediction will then be, that Naphthali 
shall be a noble and lovely tribe among the others, a race of 
princes worthy of being celebrated. This coincides with 
the sentiment expressed in the next clause, which is not very 
intelligible in the common version, and which is well ex- 
plained by the same author thus : " he affords materials for 
joyful hymns." "IS®*, which properly means ' word, dis- 
course,' may express the subject of such discourse, whether 
it be poetic or not; as in Job xxxv. 10, the term "songs" is 
equivalent to 'subjects to sing of;' and in Ps. lxix, 13, (12,) 
" I was the song of the drunkards," means, I was the subject 
of their idle mirth. According to this view of the passage, the 



chaf. xxxvii. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 395 

figure is of the same class as those used of Judah and Issa- 
char. According to Bochart's interpretation, it is of the 
same kind as that under which Joseph is represented in the 
following verses, and it is beautifully sustained in the latter 
hemistich. But as his version requires a change of the punc- 
tuation, and assigns to the word ""HfaJS a meaning which is not 
sufficiently supported by the only two places in which Tfa&S 
occurs, (Isa. xvii. 6, 9,) I thought it best to retain the old 
translation. The objection which has been urged, that the 
latter part of the verse is not in keeping with the figure con- 
tained in the former, is at best only rhetorical. The author 
may leave the metaphor with which he began, and speak of 
the tribe itself. It is not uncommon for one member of a 
parallelism to consist of figurative language, and another of 
proper terms. All the most important views of this passage 
may be found in Rosenmiiller's note. 

22. rro^ ri-fta 13-^5 snni ^ qtrn rna ]$ 

J ""l^tD - V^. ' A fruitful scion is Joseph, a fruitful scion at a 
well, the branches shoot over the wall.' The Hebrew is 
literally, ' a son of a fruitful (tree),' or, ' a son of a branch ;' 
and is so rendered by De Wette : " Sohn eines fruchtbaren 
Baums." The phraseology is evidently in the usual style 
of Hebrew poetry, and I should prefer retaining it, were it 
not for the word ili^S in the next hemistich, which ought 
then to be translated ' daughters.' But this would not be 
allowable in our language, even in poetry, and the writer 
just mentioned renders it " Sprossen, sprouts, branches." 
Jacob begins the blessing of Joseph in language which 
alludes to the signification of his name, viz. ' addition, 
increase.' See Gen. xxx. 24. He compares his son to a 
branch, or scion, or tree, growing alongside of a well or 
fountain, and putting forth new and plentiful shoots. Dathe 
supposes FliS to be used for iT"j8}3, (the quiescent & 



396 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART XI . 

being omitted,) < a branch.' See Ezek. xvii. 6, xxxi. 5, 6, 
12. Rosenmiiller explains the masculine ^ by ramus, 
and says that it is connected with the feminine adjective 
hiS, in consequence of the meaning of the synonymous 
term rn$3. The grammatical construction, he remarks, 
suits the sense, not the word, as in Judg. xviii. 7, where 
d|H is connected with £l5ltP"P, because it expresses the 
idea of society, Fnip' His translation is : " filius fructifer, 
a fruit-bearing son is Joseph, &c." Such usage is not at all 
uncommon, but whether it is necessary to resort to it in the 
present instance is far from being certain. £*H^ may be 
used as the participle for ftjiS or HiS, ' fruit-bearing, 
fruitful,' as Kimchi has remarked. See Buxtorl's Thes. 
Gram. Lib. I. cap. 49. p. 265, Basil edition, 1G29. 
The clause will then stand thus : ' a son of a fruitful,' 
(meaning tree or vine, or something equivalent,) or else, 
(taking * fruitful' as the concrete for the abstract,) * a son of 
fertility,' that is, by a common Hebraism, ' an abundantly 
fruitful plant or branch is Joseph.' Rosenmiiller objects, 
that if it be taken in the construct state it ought to be IJl, 
with a ssegol, but this only shows that the Masorets did not 
understand it in the construct ; and how easily the lower 
dot of the ssegol might be obliterated in some manuscript, 
needs no proof. Fliiil literally means ' daughters,' as the 
branches of the growing scion, the "l^ of the former clause, 
are elegantly denominated ; or, if the author has the vine 
in view, its tendrils, creeping up the walls. The vine is 
used as an image of fecundity. See Ps. cxxviii. 3. The 
plural is joined to the singular verb i~H?^ distributively, as 
if it had been said, each one shoots over. — The Septuagint 
version of this verse is as follows: 'Tihg ty%Y\ii.£vog'lu<fr)<p, vug 
7lv%v}p4vog |xa Qrfhurog, viog px vswrocrog- itgog fxs dvatfr^s-^ov. It is 



CHAP. XXXvii. 1— L.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 397 

plain, that the translators used a copy with a different read- 
ing from the present Masoretical. See Schleusner, ubi sup. 
under ^vikurog and vs^rarog. In part, the Septuagint coincides 
with the Samaritan. See Dathe's note. 

23. The meaning of this verse is very clear. It refers to 
the animosity which Joseph's brethren had cherished, and 
the hostile conduct which they had pursued towards him. 
The figure is changed, and they are represented as archers 
shooting at their enemy with the fixed purpose of de- 
stroying him. For the meaning of r i!S1, see Rosenmuller 
in loc. 

24. "iSHtpp "l? 11 ^ itfEn. 'But his bow continued strong; 
literally, in strength, the adjective IfV 1 ^ being used as a 
noun.' — "PT ^"iT ^SJl, ' and his arms were active.' 
Rosenmuller considers "PT ^3HT as equivalent to "PJ'IT, 
his arms, the latter word being redundant. Others suppose 
^J^T to be used figuratively for might. Thus Gesenius : 
" the power (might) of his hands." But in all the instances 
cited by him, except Job xxii. 9, Ps. xxxvii. 17, and Dan. 
xi. 15, 22, 31, the word is singular, and it is this form which 
is usually employed in this metaphorical sense, and there- 
fore I have preferred following Rosenmuller. Perhaps too 
it may be worth noting, that in the excepted places more 
than one individual, a class of persons, is referred to. The 
word TT3 occurs also in 2 Sam. vi. 16, and in both these 
places seems to convey the idea of the cognate Arabic 
word, -li ' to be light, nimble, active.' See Dathe in loc. 
and Schultens' Opera Minora, p. 132—135. "Pitt ^Tfa 

:b^nt?n pS «th tD$8 Sp3£. 'By the hands of the 
mighty one of Jacob, by the power (name) of the shepherd, 
the stone (rock) of Israel.' There is great difficulty in 
settling the connexion and meaning of this and the following 



398 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART XI . 

clauses. De Wette completes a period with "I^T, (which 
is sanctioned by the accent Athnach,) and translates the 
remainder of this verse, and the twenty-fifth, thus : 

Aus der Hand des gewaltigen Jakobs, 

Vom Fiihrer, vom Felsen Israels, 
25. Vom Gott deines Vaters, er half dir, 

Vom Allmachtigen, er segnete dich, 
Komme dir Segen des Himmels von obenher, 

Segen der Tiefe unten, 
Segen der Briiste und des Mutterleibs ! 

By the hand of the powerful Jacob, 

From the leader, from the rock of Israel, 
25. From the God of thy father, he helped thee, 
From the Almighty, he blessed thee, 

Come to thee blessings of the heaven from above, 
Blessings of the deep below, 

Blessings of the breasts and of the womb ! 

Dathe connects the remainder of the twenty-fourth verse 
with the preceding clause, and for dtifa, ' from thence,' he 
would read dtp)2, ' from the name,' corresponding with 
"H^, and supported by the Syriac version, )oa —Loo. 

He supposes the patriarch to refer to the history in Gen^ 
xxviii. 12, 13, the occasion of his distress, when God gave 
him the most ample promises. His version is this : " — by 
the help of the mighty God, whom Jacob worshipped, by 
■him who guarded the stone of Israel." In a note he adds 
as follows : " It appears to me that the narrative in Gen. 
: xxviii. 12, 13, suggests a simple and natural exposition of 
£his verse. At a time when Jacob very greatly needed the 
olivine assistance, God granted him most ample promises? 



chap, xxxvil. 1— L.] NOTES TO GEXE3I3. 399 

while asleep with a stone for his pillow. Therefore, says 
he, the same God, who was present with me in the most 
dangerous period of my life, hath also defended thee in thy 
calamities. Thus he explains himself in the next verse." 
— Rosenmiiller, who gives the same view of the passage 
from Teller's, Not. Crit., remarks, that there is considerable 
harshness in speaking of God as the shepherd or defender of 
a stone. He supposes Joseph to be intended by these ex- 
pressions, and retains the reading ID 1 ©)?, which he interprets 
by, ' from that time,' which is, to say the least, a very 
doubtful meaning of the word. See Note 15. p. 179, 180. 
Inde pascens erat et lapis Israelis ; ' from the time that he 
escaped the difficulties which had oppressed him, he sus- 
tained myself and family.' Jacob calls his son ' the shep- 
herd' of Israel, because he had supplied the wants of his 
household and raised them to affluence, and ' the stone,' be- 
cause he had been their prop and support.' — I do not see 
any more harshness in representing God as the protector of 
Jacob's stone than there is in speaking of him as the " keeper 
of the city." Ps. cxxvii. 1. If there were, it would be re- 
moved by the expository translation of Herder, " who 
watched Israel on his stone : Von Namen dess, der Israel 
auf seinem Stein bewachte." Letters on the Study of The- 
ology, (Briefe, &c.) p. 76. Amidst so much uncertainty 
it is difficult to come to any satisfactory and certain result. 
In the version above offered, I have adopted the reading 
i-P, retaining its common translation " name," which must 
be considered as conveying also the idea of power, a mean- 
ing which is undoubtedly implied in the word, and which 
corresponds with the parallel ^T. It seems most probable, 
too, from the use of the preposition V2 prefixed to both 
these words, in connexion with the parallelism of the clauses, 
that both relate to the same object. The word FtSH is 



400 NOTES TO GENESIS* [part XL 

beautifully applied to God as the patriarch's kind and tender 
protector, (see Ps. xxiii. 1.) and there is no difficulty in con- 
sidering 15^ as in opposition with it, and expressive of 
almighty support, in which sense the corresponding term 
l^, * rock,' is often employed. 

25. 'By the God of thy father, who will help thee, and by 
the Almighty, who will bless thee with blessings of heaven 
above, blessings of the deep which lieth below, blessings of 
the breasts and of the womb.' — Some commentators suppose 
an ellipsis immediately after the words " who will bless 
thee,' which they supply with ' be thou blessed,' or ' let them 
come,' as may suit the language of the context. But if the 
twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth verses be connected, as in the 
translation of the analysis, which gives to the preposition 
Xf2 before ^T^P, EtEJ (Otf,) and b& the same general mean- 
ing, and making the three nouns relate to the same being, 
the necessity of adding any thing to the text is removed. 
In ^pt?_1 ana " ^?^5^- tne vau expresses the sense of Tffi?^, 
who. £"))H?1 £"l!$in QifiiTl is rendered by Dathe terrce ei 
(that is, coelo,) suhjectce. But diHSTl does not appear to be 
used in this sense. The common phrase for 'earth below,' 
when antithetic to ' heaven above', is tin!? fa 3H!$. See 
Exod. xx. 4. Deut. iv. 39, v. 8. As " blessings of heaven 
above" refers to seasonable rains and copious dews, moist- 
ening and fertilizing the ground, and preparing it to yield 
plentiful harvests, so it would seem that " blessings of the 
deep that lieth below," must be intended to express fountains, 
lakes and streams of water, which promote fertility and 
conduce to the agreeableness and advantages of a country* 
The last clause plainly denotes a strong and numerous poste- 
rity. Compare the imprecatory language in Hos. ix. 14. 

26. n>33 ma& i? ■nin Sd^-I.? 1-155 ^p5$ W5 

: fibi2. ' The blessings of thy father exceed the blessings 



CHAP, xxxvii. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 401 

of the everlasting mountains, the desirable things of the 
eternal hills.' — For TiiTl the Samaritan Pentateuch has ^51, 
' mountains,' which is probably the true reading, or else 
'Hifij "nil being considered as an old form of Itt,* in either 
case 1^ being connected with it, and not disjoined as ip the 
Rabbinical text by the Sakeph katon. This appears to have 
been the reading from which the Septuagint version was 
made : vtfsg ivXoyictg ogsuv juuovijxwv, xcu sV' svXoyiaig Sivwv ctsvotwv. 
It is supported by the corresponding word £1253 in the 
parallel hemistich, and the meaning thus obtained, which I 
have expressed in the translation, is preferred by several 
modern critics, among whom may be found the names of 
De Wette, Dathe and Gesenius. This reading is also con- 
firmed by the parallel place in Deut. xxxiii. 15, BJShJSFI 
tDbi2 im'255 "I^fr! Q1j5r h T!5>— " ancient mountains"— 
and the other in Hab. iii. 6, «ltf IJ-^llO ^S^.l 
dbiJP lTli233 — " everlasting mountains." Rosenmiiller, who 
prefers retaining the usual punctuation, remarks, that " al- 
though rriJl properly means, * to conceive, to be pregnant,' 
yet, like ib^ it is used indifferently of father or mother, 
so that rnin is properly, what gives conception, father." 
But he produces no evidence in support of his assertion, and 
Dathe states, " that «Tin is always used of the female, 
never of the male," which I believe is true, except in cases 
where the word is applied figuratively. Rosenmiiller says 
indeed, that, although the data by which the other view is 
supported are specious, the result to which it leads is inele- 
gant and far-fetched ; nor is it easy to perceive, why eternity 
should be repeated, that is, predicated both of mountains 

* Gesenius, Geschichte der Heb. Spr. und Schrift, § 56. p. 119, and 
Lexicon under Tl<l 1. 
51 



402 NOTES TO GENESIS. [part xi. 

and hills. To prove that the result is as he states, would be 
difficult ; and the latter remark certainly needs no reply, as 
the application of the term eternal or everlasting to the 
mountains and hills, is plainly intended to increase the poetic 
effect, and to make the parallelism more perfect. — The 
meaning appears to be this : * the blessings which thy father 
invokes on thee are superior to the blessings, (the best pro- 
ductions,) of the perpetual mountains, the most desirable 
gifts of the eternal hills ;' in other words, they are the most 
excellent that paternal affection can pray for. — The other 
translation, "the blessings of thy father have prevailed 
above the blessings of my progenitors," conveys a sense 
which is not very probable. The patriarch would hardly an- 
nounce the magnificence of his own prophetic benediction 
by contrasting it with those of his venerated ancestors, nei- 
ther indeed can it be said, in reference to Joseph, that the 
blessings promised him are superior to those which had 
been made to Jacob himself, (see Gen. xxvii. 28, 29. xxiii. 3, 
4,) to say nothing of the glorious promises both of a tempo- 
ral and spiritual kind which God had given to Abraham. — 
If the word il^&B he derived from fi&jtin, equivalent to 
Tnfl, 'to mark out,' it may be translated ' bound/ as it is in 
our English version, founded on some ancient Jewish au- 
thorities ; but its usual meaning is * delight, desire, object 
of desire.' — There is no difficulty in the remainder of the 
verse, unless it be in the word TTJ. It is derived from Ifa, 
* to separate, distinguish,' namely, for excellencies and dig- 
nity. If, with many late critics, we consider it as a denomina- 
tive from 1t5.' ' « crown, a diadem] it will be equivalent to, 
he that wears the crown, in other words, the prince, the noblest 
among his brethren. The general idea is the same as that just 
stated. The same phrase "PH$ TT5 in Deut. xxxiii. 16, is 
translated in the Septuagint version do%ud%stg sv dfe\<poig, and this 



chap, xxxvu. 1— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 403 

is the meaning which is given here by the Targum of Jona- 
than: *mm *op;o Tnn ffynjwo to^to'i nn mfn, 'who 

was prince and ruler in Egypt, and distinguished (literally 
shining, splendid,) by honor of his brethren,' that is, by the 
respect which his brothers paid him. See Rosenmiiller in 
loc. The same idea of superior dignity is conveyed also by 
the Syriac version, JLa^o ±±h *\ ' upon the head of the 
diadem/ that is, the head of him who was honored with the 
diadem, the abstract being used, most probably, for the con- 
crete. The Septuagint, in making Joseph the ruler over his 
brethren agrees in this meaning, *wv vjyfytfaro aSsXcpuv.* 

27. * Benjamin is a wolf, he tears in pieces : in the 
morning he devours the prey, and at evening he divides 
the spoil.' This verse describes the warlike disposition of 
the tribe, and the rapacity with which they would spoil 
their enemies. Some have supposed the meaning to be, 
that the booty obtained would be so immense as to be 
sufficient for Benjamin's consumption not only in the morn- 
ing, but through the whole day, even until the evening, and 
also for the consumption of others. Some again understand 
it thus, that the booty, which he had divided at evening, 
should be abundantly sufficient to last until the morning. 
See Rosenmiiller in loc. Probably, however, nothing more 
is intended than this, that both morning and evening, day 
and night, in other words, at all times, he will be dividing 
the booty or devouring the prey. Rapacity and destruc- 
tiveness could scarcely be expressed in bolder and more 
graphical poetry. 

* It may not be unworthy of remark, that Schiller in some of his tra- 
gedies uses the same figure. Thus, in his William Tell, act iii. scene 
2, Rudentz says to Bertha : Da sen' ich Dich, die Krone aller Frauen. 
And in the Maid or Orleans, act i. scene 4, Charles applies the 
same term to Agnes Sorel. 



404 NOTES TO GENESIS. [ PART XI . 

(165.) This is doubtless the true meaning of the phrase 
*)T)_5 1353 m tn ^ s place, and most probably it should 
always be rendered * beyond/ or ' on the other side of the 
Jordan/ wherever it occurs ; although it is maintained by 
some commentators and critics, that it means ' on this or 
on that side indifferently/ and. in our English translation it 
is sometimes rendered " on this side," and sometimes 
" beyond Jordan." See Hengstenberg's examination of 
this phrase, ubi sup. II. p. 313 — 324. — The cavalcade that 
attended the remains of Jacob was probably accompanied 
by some military force, to protect it from hostile bands. 
See v. 9. Avoiding a march into Canaan by the most 
direct course, perhaps from motives of a prudential kind, 
the company proceeded along its southern border to the 
eastern extremity, where, after the second mourning was 
finished, they crossed to the western bank of the Jordan, 
and, unattended probably by the armed force, proceeded to 
the place of interment. The country beyond Jordan is 
clearly contradistinguished from " the land of Canaan" in 
v. 13. So also in Num. xxxii. 32: "we will pass over 
armed into the land of Canaan, that the possession of our 
inheritance beyond the Jordan may be ours ;" that is, as is 
proved by the twenty-ninth and thirty-third verses, the 
country lying east of the Jordan : and xxxv. 14 : "ye shall 
give three cities beyond the Jordan, and three cities shall ye 
give in the land of Canaan' 1 In these two last places, our 
translation has " on this side Jordan ;" but in both, the 
original phrase is XT^ "l3Ste- In Num. xxxii. 19, the 
use of the term is very remarkable. The Reubenites and 
Gadites, who settled on the east of Jordan, say to Moses : 
" we will not inherit with them," (the other tribes,) ." beyond 
the Jordan and forward, fi^ll )TW' 152ft, because 
our inheritance is fallen to us beyond the Jordan eastward, 
5innt)p yrm 13.%." It is not to be supposed that the 



CHAP, xxxvir. I— l.] NOTES TO GENESIS. 405 

same phrase is employed in opposite senses in such a con- 
nexion, although such seems to have been the opinion of 
the English translator of the book, who, in the former case, 
renders it " on yonder side," and in the latter, " on this 
side." The phrase signifies beyond the Jordan in both cases, 
and the word added in each shows the reader which side is 
meant. The opinion of Gesenius, under "Ijl?, 1- (Robin- 
son's Translation, p. 734,) that "this expression is (some- 
times) applied to the country west of the Jordan, by a later 
idiom, it would seem, \uhich probably arose during the 
Babylonian exile," is unfounded in fact and not necessary 
to illustrate the texts. The truth seems to be, that the 
phrase had a definite, geographical sense, designating the 
country lying east of the Jordan, similar to the use of 
transalpine Gaul among the Romans ; and was also used to 
denote the region on the side of the river opposite to that 
occupied by the writer, or the possession of which he re- 
garded at the time of writing as having been already 
entirely secured by conquest. If so, the word will always 
retain one uniform meaning, although it may be employed, 
according to circumstances, to designate the territory lying 
on either side of the river. 



FINIS 



J. P. Wright, Printer. 13 New Street, New York. 



13 1% 







Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: June 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township. PA 16066 
(724) 779-21 1 1 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




014 380 631 5 % 



